Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Battery Energy Storage Ordinance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission recommends approval of battery energy storage ordinance with amendments

5379326 · February 24, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Surry County Planning Commission on Feb. 24 recommended the Board of Supervisors approve an ordinance to regulate battery energy storage systems, with edits on setback buffering, noise limits, lighting and decommissioning language.

The Surry County Planning Commission on Feb. 24 recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve an ordinance amendment (PC ordinance amendment 2024-04) establishing standards for battery energy storage systems (BESS) in the county.

The commission's recommendation, approved by voice vote with one recorded nay, incorporates numerous edits proposed by the applicant and additional changes requested by commissioners and staff. The ordinance, as amended by the commission, sets site standards including a minimum cleared buffer around BESS facilities, a noise threshold measured at adjacent occupied structures, dark-sky lighting requirements, and decommissioning provisions addressing salvage value.

Scott Foster, the applicant's attorney, summarized edits made in response to prior commission comments. "The application shall include those items, and then other things that may be determined as necessary by the planning director," Foster said while describing documentation to accompany applications. He also summarized changes to setback and buffer language and to notification and fire-protection provisions.

The commission agreed to revise a proposed "20-foot buffer around the perimeter of the battery energy storage system's outermost structures" to require the buffer around the facility fence line. Foster read the proposed working text: "A minimum of 20-foot buffer shall be established around the perimeter of the battery energy storage system's outermost structures. Such buffer shall be cleared of combustible vegetation and other combustible growth." Commissioners asked staff to change the reference from "outermost structures" to the facility fence line; Foster agreed to that edit.

Noise limits were discussed at length. The draft ordinance would require compliance with a 65 dBA limit at the property line in some districts but includes a 55 dBA limit at the outer wall of any occupied structure on an adjacent parcel in the AR district that exists at the time of the project's CUP approval. Foster explained that the 55 dBA standard measures sound at an adjacent structure's outer wall and said it was chosen to be sensitive to adjacent uses. He noted equipment noise varies by manufacturer and that final compliance would be demonstrated with manufacturer specifications and testing at the final site-plan stage. Foster said, "it can be easily corrected with some sound barrier," if measured noise exceeded limits.

On lighting, the draft was revised to require dark-sky-compliant fixtures, most likely downward-facing and motion-activated. On decommissioning, the applicant requested that estimated salvage value be allowed to offset decommissioning costs, consistent with how some solar projects are treated. Commissioners debated changing the draft wording from "shall" to "may" regarding using salvage value to offset decommissioning costs. Staff said changing to "may" would leave discretion but would require additional criteria or process to ensure consistent treatment across projects.

Commissioners discussed additional implementation steps including a site visit to existing facilities. Staff reported potential sites in Chesterfield and Sussex and said visits were possible though logistics can be complicated on active construction sites. Staff recommended proceeding with an ordinance recommendation while arranging field visits before project-specific review, noting the ordinance would not permit applications until the Board acted.

The commission then voted to recommend approval of PC ordinance amendment 2024-04 with staff-recommended edits and the two stipulations discussed at the meeting (changing buffer reference to fence line and revising decommissioning language as deliberated). Chair Wooden announced the outcome: "The ayes have it. The motion is carried." The transcript records one member voting "nay." The recommendation will go to the Board of Supervisors for final action.

Votes at a glance: Motion to recommend approval of PC ordinance amendment 2024-04 (incorporating applicant edits, staff recommendations, fence-line buffer change, and decommissioning language deliberation) ' mover: Commissioner Pierce (motion recorded in transcript); seconder: (voice); outcome: approved with one recorded nay.