Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Resiliency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plan Commission denies Gunderson microgrid request to use gravel surface; city consultant recommended paving
Summary
The commission denied a planned commercial/industrial district amendment that would have allowed a gravel surface inside a fenced microgrid electrical yard, after city consultant analysis recommended paving for safety and code consistency.
The Onalaska Plan Commission voted Jan. 28 to deny an amendment request by Gunderson Clinic Limited that would have allowed a gravel surface inside a fenced microgrid electrical yard at 3150 Gunderson Drive.
Applicant representatives and utilities contractors told the commission the microgrid will house battery energy storage to store solar and landfill-generated energy and to provide campus resiliency during outages. Clint Nernest, engineer for PowerSecure, said the battery yard will have locked fencing, limited quarterly maintenance access and no parking; he asked the commission to allow crushed-stone surfacing, which he described as industry practice for electrical yards.
Michelle Fix Westall, representing Xcel Energy, said gravel provides better drainage, easier snow management and industry-standard safety and maintenance benefits. City staff, however, had the site and the applicant materials reviewed by Strand Associates. Shane Zenz, P.E., (Strand Associates) concluded the microgrid enclosures contain no exposed live parts, operate at voltages at or below 660 volts (not typical high-voltage substation levels), and that available resistivity data indicate asphalt would provide a more electrically resistive surface than gravel. Based on Strand's review and the city's pavement policy, staff recommended denying the gravel request and requiring paving; staff proposed 12 conditions of approval if the commission approved the amendment as drafted.
During deliberations commissioners debated consultant credibility and operational access. Eric Archer moved to deny the amendment; Bill Lethen seconded. The commission voted to deny the amendment. Chair Kim Smith explained that a denial would send the item to the Common Council; staff confirmed the Council will review the matter regardless of the commission's vote. The denial preserves the city's standard requirement that areas intended for vehicle driving or parking be paved.
