Commission tables battery energy storage zoning changes after debate on buffers, fencing and noise
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
After extended discussion of buffers, fence height, decommissioning, setbacks and noise limits, the Charlotte County Planning Commission voted to table proposed battery energy storage zoning regulations until its December meeting to allow additional revisions and public input.
The Charlotte County Planning Commission on Nov. 21 tabled proposed zoning regulations to address battery energy storage after commissioners raised a series of technical and siting concerns.
Staff reminded the commission that the Board of Supervisors had referred battery energy storage to the Planning Commission in October and that East Point Energy subsequently withdrew its zoning application. Staff presented revised draft regulations and asked the commission for further guidance; a public hearing and commission recommendation are required by Jan. 25, 2025.
Commissioners discussed siting and design details intended to reduce visual and environmental impacts. The commission recommended adding a 20-foot minimum buffer inside the fence line between system components and the fencing and discussed locating equipment toward the interior of lots to maximize buffering. Commissioner Belinda Strom noted the Department of Wildlife Resources had not issued guidance on fencing and recommended that, absent DWR guidance, security fencing be a minimum of seven feet tall and include an anti-climbing device.
Strom also raised concerns about the draft regulations’ treatment of decommissioning, stormwater management, erosion and setbacks from creeks and rivers and suggested lowering the proposed 60 dBA maximum noise limit to 40 dBA, "approximately equivalent to the hum of a refrigerator." Former applicant Benjamin Hadlock of East Point Energy told the commission that "most of the noise is associated with HVAC equipment and is not constant" and said achieving a 40 dBA limit would "probably not [be] feasible." Commissioners agreed to add the phrase "an independent third-party" before "professional engineer" in a conditioning provision and to remove "or contractor" from two items.
Commissioner Miller Adams, drawing on recent attendance at a Virginia Clean Economy Act summit, cautioned about multiple new battery technologies and pilot projects and recommended either limiting battery energy storage to the Industrial Zoning District or requiring rezoning to Industrial; staff warned rezoning could create spot-zoning concerns and potentially allow other industrial uses. Commissioners discussed Sussex County’s approach, which restricts battery storage to accessory uses on properties with existing generation or as a principal use adjacent to such properties.
After discussion, Commissioner David Watkins moved to table the item until the commission’s December meeting; Commissioner Strom seconded. The motion carried with all members present voting yes.
The commission and staff agreed to return with revised language addressing buffers, fencing, noise limits, decommissioning and other technical items for further review and a public hearing in advance of the Jan. 25, 2025 recommendation deadline.