Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves amended solar ordinance but removes Dominion supervision requirement
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing featuring developers, industry groups and many residents on both sides, the board voted to approve advertised amendments to the solar ordinance, striking a clause that had required Dominion Power to supervise developer permits.
The Nottoway County Board held an extended public hearing on proposed amendments to its solar energy facility ordinance and ultimately approved the advertised changes while excluding one added requirement that a developer's permitted site be supervised by Dominion Power.
Staff opened the item by describing major edits: removing the prior 50‑acre/5‑MW cap in favor of a countywide cap expressed in megawatts (170 MW), deleting the term "medium scale," adjusting landscaping requirements and refining setbacks; staff also said the planning commission had voted 8–0 to deny the recommended amendments and forward the strict ordinance that existed previously. The presenter noted Dominion had told staff it could not "supervise a site," and the board agreed to strike the developer supervision requirement (section 4‑19‑10(7)).
Developers and industry representatives told the board the proposed language as advertised would still make small projects feasible and emphasized tax revenue and economic opportunity if reasonable setbacks and variance paths remain. Paul Cousins of CEP Solar and Esther Rekelman of Hexagon Energy described projects of roughly 3 MW that could be operational in 2027 if the ordinance allowed reasonable setbacks and case‑by‑case exceptions. A private developer representative, Bobby, said his group had contracts with 25 landowners and planned a project called Rocky Ford Solar that could be operational by 2028.
Opponents urged retaining the more restrictive original ordinance and warned of landscape change and community impacts; multiple residents insisted the board keep strong setbacks. Board members debated whether increasing the allowable megawatts would be "less restrictive" to some residents while "more restrictive" to others, and discussed whether changes would need to return to the planning commission. The chair clarified the advertised changes and built a motion that approved the advertised ordinance amendments excluding the Dominion supervision requirement. The board then took a roll call vote; the motion passed on the floor.
The board also discussed including language that allows the board and planning commission to reduce setbacks on a case‑by‑case basis and considered a concession to allow smaller projects (5 MW or less) reduced setback options. The vote record and motion text were captured in the meeting minutes; the accepted ordinance will proceed toward final adoption as amended by tonight's vote.
