Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Amherst County board directs public hearing on energy storage ordinance, discusses comprehensive plan language
Summary
The Board of Supervisors voted to advertise Ordinance 2025-1 (energy storage) for public hearing Sept. 16 after staff outlined permit rules, setbacks, safety standards and a revenue-share model; supervisors also debated comprehensive-plan language that encourages siting east of Route 29 and whether to note the M‑1 industrial district.
The Amherst County Board of Supervisors voted Sept. 2 to advertise Ordinance 2025‑1, an energy storage ordinance that would make utility-scale battery storage a special-exception use in the county, and set a public hearing for Sept. 16.
The ordinance, presented by county planning staff, would allow energy storage only as a special exception in the M‑1 industrial district and would require a public hearing and comprehensive‑plan review for every facility. Staff described proposed standards including a 75‑foot setback from non‑common‑ownership property lines (with no setback between adjoining industrial parcels), a 20‑acre maximum lot coverage, a 20‑foot maximum height, and required screening (double staggered evergreens or single row plus an opaque fence). The draft also would require automatic shutdown and 24/7 automatic fire detection, compliance with NFPA 855, fire‑marshal approval, coordinated emergency response planning with county fire and emergency management, and training materials for first responders.
Staff said the draft includes a revenue‑share mechanism modeled on the county’s solar payments: $1,400 per megawatt, escalating 10% every five years, with the option to combine a siting agreement and machinery-and-tools tax to maximize county receipts.
The board also discussed related comprehensive‑plan language that currently “promotes” energy storage east of Route 29 and Route 29 Business but does not prohibit proposals west of 29 if they do not adversely affect adjoining property, resources or residents. Several supervisors urged clarifying the comprehensive plan to explicitly reference the M‑1 district; staff agreed that language could be added and that the change would not substantially alter what had already been advertised for public hearing.
Why it matters: Utility‑scale battery storage is a new land‑use type for Amherst County. The ordinance sets permitting standards and public‑safety requirements and establishes a revenue framework that could affect future applications and county revenue.
Board action: Supervisor Adams moved to direct staff to advertise Ordinance 2025‑1 for a public hearing on Sept. 16, 2025, at 7 p.m.; the motion passed. Later, Supervisor Martin moved to forward the draft comprehensive‑plan language to the Sept. 16 public hearing provided M‑1 industrial district language was added; that motion passed.
What’s next: The ordinance and the comprehensive‑plan amendment will come before the board at a public hearing Sept. 16, when members of the public and staff can present comments and the board may choose to adopt, amend or defer the ordinance.
