Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BZA affirms zoning administrator, voids Scout Storage site approvals
Summary
The Accomack County Board of Zoning Appeals voted to uphold the zoning administrator's determination that the conditional use permit for the Scout Storage battery project expired on July 20, 2025, declaring the March 10, 2026 site plan and land-disturbance permit null and void. The decision followed hours of testimony from the developer and scores of residents who raised safety and quality-of-life concerns.
The Accomack County Board of Zoning Appeals on June 3 affirmed the zoning administrator's determination that Conditional Use Permit CUSE000268-2021 for Scout Storage had expired on July 20, 2025, and ruled the site plan and land-disturbance permit approved March 10, 2026, null and void.
Lee Pamby, the deputy county administrator and designated zoning administrator, told the board the county's decision rested on the plain language of the CUP condition requiring either substantial construction (50% of the sound wall) or commencement of use by the three-year mark. "As of that date, no plans had been submitted for approval, and no land disturbance had occurred," Pamby said, arguing the permit had therefore expired. County counsel Jan Procter reiterated that under Virginia law the zoning-administrator determination is presumed correct and the burden of proof was on Scout to rebut that presumption.
Scout representatives said the project had moved through a long, off-site critical path and that the company had invested heavily in reliance on county actions. Harold Patterson, president of Patterson Construction and developer for Scout, said the company "invested more than $13,000,000 into the project" and urged the board to reverse the determination. Attorney George Holes said Scout had completed about 75% of the project's critical path by July 20, 2025, and that the work unique to battery storage projects meant visible on-site construction comes late in the sequence.
Residents urged the board to uphold the county decision, citing safety, noise and property-value concerns. "This field has been part of the landscape that makes the Eastern Shore special," one nearby resident said during public comment, urging the board to consider local emergency-response capacity.
After deliberation a board member moved to affirm the zoning administrator's decision; the motion carried. The board's action means the March 10, 2026 approvals are void and that no further work related to the expired CUP may proceed unless and until the developer obtains new, valid approvals. The board noted that the appellant retains the right to seek vested-rights determinations or to pursue other administrative or judicial remedies.
