Brighton board tables GCI Eastwater battery storage incentive-zoning decision to Dec. 30

Supervisor Bill Mey opened a public hearing Dec. 10 on GCI Eastwater LLC’s incentive-zoning application for a proposed battery energy storage system near Mortimer Street and said the town board would not decide the matter that night.

Mitch Bower, president and founder of GCI, described the company as a developer of “standalone energy storage projects” and traced the site’s review history: the board previously referred the project to the planning board, which recommended the project move forward with several conditions. GCI presented supplemental materials submitted in response to planning staff comments and to a public letter in the record.

Why it matters: The project would place energy-storage containers on a roughly 18.87-acre parcel, with about 4.3 acres of disturbed area; GCI said the remainder could be placed under a conservation easement to be preserved for wildlife. Supporters say the facility would improve grid reliability and enable more renewable generation to connect to local lines. Neighbors and some board members pressed the applicant on visual impacts, proximity to the Lehigh Valley Trail and fire safety — concerns that the town said require careful review before authorizing zoning incentives.

On safety and code: GCI and consultants described the project’s fire-safety design and state code compliance. A presenter (Mr. Brennan) emphasized that New York’s post-2018 code changes and NFPA 855 standards require separation between energy-storage units and extensive testing: “The separation is so important,” he said, arguing that modern unitization and UL testing reduce the risk of fire propagation between containers. GCI representatives also noted the project would use lithium iron phosphate (LFP) chemistry rather than higher‑energy-density NMC chemistries and described battery-management systems and multiple monitoring redundancies required by code.

Visual, site and screening issues: GCI said its visual-impact materials show the proposed containers (about 12 feet tall) would be largely screened by existing vegetation and that the area already contains tall transmission lines and a National Grid substation. The company acknowledged the utility’s on-site substation rendering is not yet finalized and suggested the town could segment that portion of environmental review if needed.

Public input: West Brighton resident Meline Schmidt asked how neighbors would be kept informed; the applicant said all supplemental materials are being entered into the hearing record and will be posted to the town web page. Neighbor Mike Ferrell asked about container counts and sizing; GCI said the plan shows 66 standalone blocks (134 where units are placed back-to-back) meeting state spacing standards.

Board action: After taking testimony and receiving the applicant’s supplemental materials into the record, the board voted to table further action — including the environmental classification and any incentive-zoning decision — to the board’s Dec. 30 meeting at noon so staff and the public can review the additional information. The motion to table was seconded by Council member Warner and carried by roll call.

What’s next: The public hearing remains open and the board indicated it expects to revisit the SEQRA classification and the application at the Dec. 30 meeting. The applicant said it is pursuing NAERTA procurement timelines that could influence project timing, and members of the public may submit additional comments before the board reopens the hearing.

Attribution: Quotes and specific technical comments quoted above are taken directly from participants during the Dec. 10 hearing and are attributed to the speakers who made them in the record.