Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board advances Inverness solar application after approving applicant appeal; setbacks and historic easement remain points of contention
Summary
After a public hearing and wide community comment, the board approved an appeal allowing Sean and Catherine Haney’s solar application to advance and later approved the related special exception for a 5‑MW, ~40‑acre solar site with setback reductions subject to staff conditions and corrected decommissioning language.
The Nottoway County Board of Supervisors approved an appeal and then voted to grant a special exception for a proposed 5‑megawatt, approximately 40‑acre solar project submitted by Sean and Catherine Haney at 884 Inverness Road.
At the first public hearing the board considered whether the application substantially conformed with the county’s comprehensive plan under Virginia code §15.2‑2232. Planning staff (Greg Zote) told supervisors that, after site visits and a review of the application, he believed the project substantially conformed to the plan and recommended the board move the application forward despite planning commission objections that cited historic‑resource impacts. Brian Thomas, a planning commission member, argued the project does not substantially accord with the plan, citing deed restrictions and the property’s preservation easement.
Applicant Sean Haney said the solar footprint would use roughly 12% of his 316‑acre property, would preserve farming operations, and include pollinator‑friendly plantings. "We're talking 12% of the land total land, that we're looking at utilizing in this," Haney said, stressing the project’s limited footprint and his conversations with the National Trust for Historic Preservation.
The board voted to approve Haney’s appeal of the planning commission denial, permitting the application to proceed to a second hearing on setbacks and special exception terms. During the follow‑up hearing staff presented a recommended approval of the special exception with nine conditions addressing security fencing, erosion and stormwater plans, construction management, VDOT review, buffers for perennial streams, and a decommissioning bond; staff noted a packet inconsistency and required corrected decommissioning bond language.
After public comment both opposing and supporting the project — neighbors expressed concern about viewsheds and waivers to setback standards while economic‑development advocates urged the board to allow the application — the board approved the special exception as applied with conditions and the clarified decommissioning bond language.
Supervisors said the approval does not circumvent the National Trust’s conservation easement: the project’s advancement remains contingent upon subsequent required approvals and compliance with federal/state reviews where applicable. The board and applicant acknowledged further permitting and neighbor coordination will continue before construction could begin.
