Board hears hours of public comment as draft Ampliform siting agreement advances with reservations

The Nottoway County Board of Supervisors opened a public hearing on a draft siting agreement with Ampliform for the Rocky Ford solar project and heard several hours of testimony from residents and industry representatives before placing a motion on the floor to accept the draft with reservations. County counsel and outside counsel introduced the document as a draft intended to add protections beyond zoning, including decommissioning surety, insurance, and environmental setbacks.

Outside attorney Mike Lockerbie, who helped negotiate the draft, described the project’s negotiated financial package and mitigation steps. “So that's a total of 8,000,000,” Lockerbie said when summarizing the capital payments the county would receive assuming a roughly 100‑megawatt facility, with staged triggers including PJM interconnection deposits, building permits, construction milestones and final commissioning. He also described a separate performance agreement that would involve the revenue‑share mechanics over the project life.

Residents who opposed the draft raised concerns about farmland loss, erosion and visual impact, and questioned specific setback language in the draft that some read as allowing distances 'less than 1,200 feet' from a habitable dwelling. Brian Thomas (resident) flagged the setbacks provision, saying the applicant sought variances that would reduce the county ordinance’s intended protections: “A variance down to 75 feet is 25 of the ordinance in that particular instance,” he told the board.

Board members and counsel acknowledged the document contained drafting ambiguities and typographic errors. Counsel advised the board that the draft nature of the siting agreement and the further Special Exception Permit (SEP) process would allow additional map‑level controls and that the board could adopt the siting agreement with narrow reservations that capture the edits discussed. A motion to accept the siting agreement “with reservations within scope that we've discussed with the attorneys” was placed, seconded and taken up for roll call and further procedural discussion.

The board’s discussion emphasized that adopting a siting agreement is separate from subsequent SEP/site‑plan review where maps and plan conformity will control precise setbacks. Supervisors repeatedly stated their understanding that the intended policy is no less than 75 feet from adjacent property lines and no less than 1,200 feet from a habitable dwelling, while counsel and Ampliform representatives acknowledged clarifying language would be inserted to reflect the board’s intent.

Next steps: the board indicated it would proceed with the siting agreement subject to the editorial and scope‑limited reservations discussed on the record, and that the related performance agreement and any special exception permit would return for later review. No final implementation steps beyond that procedural action were recorded in the hearing transcript excerpt.