[00:00:02]
CALL TO ORDER MARCH 24TH PLANNING COMMISSION OF PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
[CALL TO ORDER]
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.HERE. MR. BROWN. MR. BROCKWELL. IF YOU'D ALL PLEASE RISE AS MS. ANDERSON WILL LEAD US WITH OUR INVOCATION, AND I'LL LEAD US IN OUR PLEDGE.
DEAR HEAVENLY FATHER WE JUST THANK YOU, LORD, FOR THE SAFETY, THE PROTECTION OF ALL IN TRAVEL AND COMMUTE TONIGHT TO THE MEETING.
LORD, AND JUST PRAY SPECIAL INSIGHT ON THE COMMISSION.
AND WE REVIEW THE DATA TO GIVE US THE WISDOM AND THE INSIGHT TO BE ABLE TO SEEK THE PROPER WILL AND DECISIONS IN EVERYTHING THAT WE DO LORD AND JUST WANT TO PRAY, ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE THAT ARE FIGHTING AND THE TURMOIL THAT'S GOING ON IN UKRAINE TONIGHT.
LORD AND JUST ASK THAT YOU WATCH OVER US THROUGHOUT THESE PROCEEDINGS.
AMEN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. COMMISSIONERS YOU
[ADOPTION OF AGENDA]
HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU THE AGENDA FOR THE NIGHT.IF IT'S APPROVED, EVERYBODY'S APPROVAL I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADOPT IT.
SIMMONS, SECOND BY MRS. ELDER.
CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. MR. BROWN. MR. BROCKWELL. MR. SIMMONS.
AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS OPEN TO ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSIONERS ON ANY ITEMS NOT BEING HEARD AS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM THIS EVENING.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU WILL HAVE 3 MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I HEREBY OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
THERE'S NO ONE COMING FORWARD HERE IS THERE ANYONE ON ZOOM? NO, SIR. THERE'S NO ONE ON ZOOM.
I HEREBY CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
[ORDER OF BUSINESS]
ALSO IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU HAVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 23RD, 2022 WORK SESSION MINUTES. IF THERE'S NO ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THEM TO BE APPROVED. YES, I MAKE A MOTION THEY'D BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.MOTION BY MR. JOYNER, SECOND BY MS..
YES. ALSO IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU HAVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 23RD, 24TH, 2022 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES.
IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION SO THEY BE APPROVED.
THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS PLANNING COMMISSION TRAINING.
[00:05:05]
TURN IT OVER TO MRS. WALTON FOR THIS.GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, MR. WHITTEN.
AS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, SCHEDULING OUR PLANNING COMMISSIONER TRAINING WITH DR.
CHANDLER TO COME TO PRINCE GEORGE TO HAVE A HALF DAY TRAINING.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THE AFTERNOON, SO IT WOULD RUN FROM 1 TO 5 OR 12 TO 4 IN THAT RANGE.
THE TWO DATES THAT WE DISCUSSED AT YOUR WORK SESSION ARE THURSDAY, MAY 5TH OR FRIDAY, MAY 6TH. AND THIS EVENING WE WOULD LIKE TO GET YOUR CONSENT ON WHICH OF THOSE DAYS WOULD BE BEST SO THAT WE CAN MAKE THE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE TRAINING TO GET SCHEDULED.
I WOULD PREFER THE 5TH IF IT'S SUITABLE WITH EVERYONE ELSE.
THURSDAY, MAY 5TH, AND WE WILL GET WITH DR.
CHANDLER AND GET THAT FINALIZED.
AND I WILL SEND YOU AN AGENDA AND A CALENDAR HOLD IF YOU HAVE MICROSOFT CALENDARS AND WE'LL SEND THAT OUT PROBABLY AFTER NEXT WEEK.
[PUBLIC HEARINGS]
OK AND NEXT WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE AMENDMENT OA-22-01, WHICH IS FOR BATTERY STORAGE.AND MRS. WALTON WILL PRESENT THAT TO US.
TONIGHT WE ARE HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TEXT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND REVIEW FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
WE HAVE HAD A COUPLE OF WORK SESSIONS ON THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT THAT DEALS WITH ENERGY STORAGE FACILITIES AS STANDALONE USES.
TO RECAP WHAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON IS THIS TYPE OF FACILITY IT'S NOT CURRENTLY ADDRESSED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS A STANDALONE USE.
THEY ARE ADDRESSED IF THEY'RE BUILT IN CONJUNCTION WITH A SOLAR ENERGY FACILITY.
BUT STAFF HAS RECEIVED THE REQUEST TO ADD THE DEFINITION AND THE USE TO THE CODE AS A STAND ALONE FACILITY.
WE HAVE DEVELOPED A DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
WE'VE DEFINED IT AS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN WHICH ZONING DISTRICTS IT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN.
WE ALSO ARE RECOMMENDING AN INTERNAL POLICY FOR GUIDANCE ON APPLICATION REVIEWS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID WITH THE SOLAR ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.
WE HAVE A RELATED POLICY THAT IS USED BY STAFF AND APPLICANTS THAT GUIDE THEIR APPLICATION PROCESS AND PROVIDE YOU AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WITH A REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION AND EXPECTATIONS FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
SO I WANTED TO AGAIN SHOW YOU A FEW SAMPLES OF WHAT BATTERY FACILITIES CAN LOOK LIKE.
THE INTERIOR ONE IS A WALK IN ONE, THE EXTERIOR ONE THOSE ARE COMPONENT UNITS THAT ARE SAT DOWN. AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY ARE TYPICALLY AT THIS POINT SITED AT CLOSE TO A SUBSTATION. THAT'S THEIR PURPOSE RIGHT NOW IS TO HELP SUPPORT THE POWER GRID AT VARIOUS SUBSTATION LOCATIONS.
THESE ARE, AGAIN, A COUPLE EXAMPLES THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT BEFORE.
AND ALSO IN YOUR RELATED HANDOUT MATERIALS THAT WE REVIEWED AT THE WORK SESSION WAS AN ARTICLE ABOUT THE FACILITY THAT IS BEING DEVELOPED IN CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AND THERE WAS A VERY SIMILAR PHOTO IN THAT ARTICLE FOR YOUR REFERENCE AS WELL.
AND WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT BATTERY STORAGE? WELL, THERE ARE SOME REGULATIONS, BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE, THAT HAVE ESTABLISHED THE REQUIREMENT FOR OUR POWER COMPANIES TO PROVIDE BATTERY STORAGE ENERGY TO SUPPORT THE
[00:10:06]
POWER GRID. WE ACTUALLY HAVE A 3100 MEGAWATT REQUIREMENT BY 2035, AND THERE'S INTERIM AMOUNTS IN 2025, AS WELL AS A FINAL AMOUNT IN 2045 THAT ACTUALLY WOULD AT THIS TIME, IT CURRENTLY REQUIRES STORAGE FOR ALL THE POWER CONSUMED IN VIRGINIA.BATTERY STORAGE ALLOWS BACKUP FOR ANY KIND OF INCIDENT, POWER FAILURE, HIGH USAGE DEMANDS. WE'VE SEEN INSTANCES OF THAT THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY WHERE AN ENTIRE GRID CAN GO DOWN. THIS IS TEMPORARY BACK UP ENERGY STORAGE SIMILAR TO YOU HAVING A GENERATOR AT YOUR HOUSE.
AND WHERE WOULD STANDALONE BATTERY STORAGE FACILITIES BE LOCATED IN THE COUNTY? WELL, THE FIRST OBVIOUS CHOICE WOULD BE ADJACENT OR ON SITE WITH THE SUBSTATIONS.
SO HERE IS A LIST OF OUR CURRENT SUBSTATIONS AND WHICH POWER COMPANY IS THE LEGAL OWNER.
WE HAVE ALSO, IN ADDITION TO THE PRIVATE ENTITIES WE'VE SEEN FOR REQUESTING BATTERY STORAGE DEFINITION AND INCLUSION WE DO HAVE ONE PROJECT THAT PRINCE GEORGE ELECTRIC IS WORKING WITH OLD DOMINION ELECTRIC ON DOING INSTALLING A PILOT PROGRAM HERE IN THE COUNTY. SO WE HAVE THAT PROJECT WAITING AS WELL.
SO SOME OF THE THINGS WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IN OUR DEVELOPMENT AND WORK SESSIONS WITH BOTH THE COMMISSIONERS AND THE SUPERVISORS WAS TO CONSIDER THE PROXIMITY TO SUBSTATIONS.
WHAT SIZE FACILITIES WOULD THEY BE? WHAT KIND OF SEPARATION DID WE WANT BETWEEN THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES AND STRUCTURES AND ALSO VERY CRITICAL IS THE HAZARD PROTECTIONS.
SO IN THIS TEXT, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE ARE PLANS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS TO SUBMIT FOR BOTH FIRE DEPARTMENT AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT REVIEW TO INCLUDE THINGS LIKE CONTAINMENT OF FLUIDS, TYPE OF PROTECTION FOR EXTINGUISHING A FIRE, AS WELL AS ACCESS TO THE FACILITY.
AND SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IS TO PROVIDE THAT THERE'S A PROVIDER AGREEMENT IN PLACE.
WE PREFER NOT TO SEE THESE BUILT AS SPEC PROJECTS, HOPING TO GET AN AGREEMENT WITH ONE OF THE POWER COMPANIES. WE WANT THAT IN PLACE FIRST.
AND WE ALSO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE FACILITY SCREENING AND SECURITY OF THE FACILITY AS WELL. SOME MORE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE DISCUSSED WOULD THAT FACILITIES NEED TO AVOID SENSITIVE AREAS AND ADDRESS ANY ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS.
WE NEED TO AGAIN HAVE THE FIRE AND EXPLOSION RISK MITIGATION INCLUDED WITH THEIR APPLICATION AND AS PART OF THEIR APPROVALS AS WELL AS TRAINING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS.
AND THE WATER AGAIN, THE WATER CONTAINMENT PLAN AS A COMPONENT OF THEIR ACTION PLAN.
SO SINCE YOU'VE SEEN THE ORIGINAL DRAFT OF THE ORDINANCE ONE OF THE CONCERNS BROUGHT UP BY ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WAS LOOKING AT REPLACEMENT OF A SINGLE BATTERY UNIT VERSUS DECOMMISSIONING OF THE ENTIRE SITE.
SO ON PAGE FOUR, WE DID ADD ITEM C, WHICH ADDRESSES A END OF LIFE OR A DEGRADATION OF A PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL UNIT AND HOW IT SHOULD BE REMOVED.
ALSO ON PAGE NINE, WE ADDED THE DEFINED USE TO THE APPLICABLE ZONING DISTRICT SECTION.
SO EACH OF THOSE SECTIONS WILL HAVE THAT USE ADDED.
WE DID RECEIVE. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC CITIZEN INPUT.
WE DID HAVE ONE OF OUR PRE APPLICANTS REVIEW THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AND PROVIDE COMMENTS
[00:15:03]
THAT THOSE COMMENTS ARE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.AND WE DID GO THROUGH THEM AT THE WORK SESSION.
THIS SLIDE ADDRESSES THE ITEMS THAT THEY BROUGHT UP AND ALSO STAFF'S RESPONSE AND WE'LL GET INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE.
WE DID TALK ABOUT THESE AT THE WORK SESSION AS WELL.
THERE WAS A COMMENT RECEIVED ABOUT THE SETBACKS AND CONCERNING WHETHER TO REDUCE THE 100 FOOT SETBACK OR ZONING DISTRICT SETBACK, WHICHEVER IS GREATEST LANGUAGE.
AND THE PUBLIC COMMENT WAS TO LOOK AT JUST THE UNDERLINING ZONING DISTRICT SETBACK.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO RETAIN THE CURRENT LANGUAGE WITHOUT MODIFICATION.
I THINK WE'VE SEEN THAT THE 100 FOOT SETBACK IS REFERENCED IN OTHER TYPES OF FACILITIES LIKE THIS, NOT ONLY IN PRINCE COUNTY FOR OUR OTHER ORDINANCES.
BUT ALSO WHEN I PULLED BATTERY STORAGE ORDINANCES FROM OTHER LOCALITIES, EVEN VIRGINIA BEACH, WHICH IS A VERY METROPOLITAN AREA, HAD A 100 FOOT SETBACK FOR THEIR BATTERY STORAGE. SO I DON'T THINK THE 100 FOOT IS OUT OF LINE OR UNATTAINABLE.
I THINK IT'S A GOOD SET BACK THAT IS IN LINE WITH WHAT OTHER LOCALITIES ARE DOING.
THE SECOND COMMENT RECEIVED DEALT WITH SECTION 7 E NOISE.
AND THE COMMENT RECEIVED WAS TO INCREASE THE ALLOWABLE NOISE DECIBEL LEVEL FROM 20 DBA TO 55 OR 60 DBA AT THE OUTSIDE WALL OF A NONPARTICIPATING STRUCTURE, RESIDENT, OR COMMUNITY BUILDING.
AND WE DID TALK ABOUT THIS IN LENGTH AT YOUR WORK SESSION.
AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO RETAIN THE CURRENT 20 DBA LEVEL.
THE COMMISSIONERS DID DISCUSS REVISING THAT TO THE PROPERTY LINE RATHER THAN THE EXTERIOR, THE OUTSIDE WALL OF AN ADJOINING HOUSE.
AND ACTUALLY, STAFF IS VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT RECOMMENDED CHANGE AS WELL.
SO I DID PROVIDE A SAMPLE MOTION WITH THAT LANGUAGE AT MR. SIMMONS REQUEST.
SO THAT'S AVAILABLE FOR YOUR REVIEW AS WELL.
THE NEXT COMMENT RECEIVED DEALT WITH THE DECOMMISSIONING PLAN AND THE COMMENT RECEIVED WAS TO CONSIDER INCLUDING REVISITING TIMEFRAMES FOR THE PLAN, AND THAT IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COST IN THE BOND ARE CURRENT AND UP TO DATE SO THAT IF SOME UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES CAME UP AND THE COUNTY, WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR DECOMMISSIONING THAT THE BOND IN PLACE OR SURETY IN PLACE WAS APPROPRIATE.
HOWEVER, STAFF DOES FEEL THAT ITEMS E AND F ADDRESS THIS CONCERN.
IT MAY NOT SPECIFICALLY SAY REVIEW IT EVERY THREE YEARS OR FIVE YEARS, BUT IT DOES HAVE TO INCLUDE A PLAN FOR HOW YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP THAT DECOMMISSIONING PLAN UP TO DATE.
SO I WOULD EXPECT AN APPLICANT TO TELL ME WE'LL REVISIT EVERY FOUR YEARS AND THEN STAFF WOULD SAY, YES, THAT'S ACCEPTABLE.
ANOTHER APPLICANT MAY SAY, WE'LL REVISIT EVERY SIX YEARS AND STAFF WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION IF THAT WAS ACCEPTABLE OR NOT.
I THINK WE'RE GETTING TO THE SAME PLACE.
WE JUST WENT THERE TWO DIFFERENT ROADS, BUT WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH THE SAME RESULT.
I WANTED TO REVIEW THIS AGAIN WITH YOU.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS ON MONDAY.
THE REASON THE 20 DECIBEL SOUND LIMIT IS THAT THAT TYPICALLY WITH THE 100 FOOT SETBACK AND THE BUFFERING REQUIRED AND THE ACREAGE REQUIRED IN RA AND A'S, WHICH IS A FIVE ACRE MINIMUM, THAT BY, TO WALK IT BACKWARDS FOR IT TO BE 20 DBA AT AN OUTSIDE WALL, AT AN ADJOINING PROPERTY, YOU'VE GOT TO BE REALLY LOUD TO TRAVEL THAT FAR. SO I FELT LIKE IT WAS A REASONABLE LEVEL FOR THE DISTANCE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.
I WASN'T SAYING IT HAD TO BE 20 DBA YOU KNOW, WITHIN WALKING, YOU KNOW, 3 MINUTES, THREE
[00:20:07]
STEPS AWAY.IT IS A SOUND TRAVEL AND IT WILL REDUCE AS IT TRAVELS.
SO I BELIEVE 20 IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE DISTANCE WE'RE TALKING IN THE RA OR A.
THE OTHER THING WE TALKED ABOUT MONDAY WAS COULD I PROVIDE SOME OTHER NORMAL SOUND, COMMON SOUND LEVELS.
AND THIS CHART HERE CAN SHOW YOU WHAT DECIBEL LEVELS ARE FOR SOME COMMON OUTDOOR LEVELS AND SOME COMMON INDOOR LEVELS.
AND IF YOU LOOK, I THINK WHAT WE FOCUSED ON WAS A QUIET RURAL NIGHT, WHICH YOU SEE IS DOWN AROUND 20 OR 30.
SO I FELT LIKE IT IS APPROPRIATE IF YOU WERE IN A STRUCTURE THAT WAS A NON PARTICIPATING GIVEN THE DISTANCE, YOU WILL MORE THAN LIKELY BE THAT THAT'S A DECIBEL LEVEL THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE.
SOME OTHER WORK SESSION DISCUSSION ITEMS BEYOND THE COMMENTS THAT YOU RECEIVED.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT RA AND A REQUIRE A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF FIVE ACRES AND WHAT WOULD IT BE IN THE M DISTRICTS.
AND THERE'S ACTUALLY NO ACREAGE MINIMUM IN THE M DISTRICT.
BUT AGAIN, THOSE ARE YOUR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS.
THERE IS A 70% LOT COVERAGE RESTRICTION THOUGH, AND THERE'S ALSO A DIFFERENT NOISE LEVEL THAT'S EXPECTED AND TOLERATED IN THE M DISTRICT.
SO SHOULD WE SPECIFY A DIFFERENT SOUND LEVEL FOR M VERSUS RA AND A? WE ALSO DISCUSSED THE SOUND LEVEL TO BE AT THE PROPERTY LINE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAD DONE ON OTHER ORDINANCE AMENDMENT THAT DEAL WITH EQUIPMENT LIKE THIS.
AND YES, I THINK THAT IS APPROPRIATE.
AND SHOULD WE VERIFY THE SOUND LEVELS? I DID PULL THE SIMILAR SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUESTS AND THE COPIES WERE AT YOUR DESK.
I DID NOT SEE A NOISE LEVEL FOR THE SUBSTATION ON MIDDLE ROAD.
HOWEVER, THERE WAS A LOT OF THINGS THAT DID REFERENCE AT THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND AGAIN, I DO AGREE THAT THAT IS A MUCH BETTER DEFINITION TO USE AS WELL AS WHEN YOU THINK OF ENFORCEMENT.
IT WOULD BE MUCH BETTER FOR STAFF TO ENFORCE THAT AT THE PROPERTY LINE RATHER THAN HAVING TO GO TO A PROPERTY OWNER AND SAY, CAN WE MEASURE SOUND OUT HERE AT YOUR WALL? IT ACTUALLY IS A BETTER SUGGESTION.
AND THEN AGAIN, SHOULD WE INCLUDE A MINIMUM ACREAGE FOR M DISTRICTS OR BECAUSE THEY ARE INDUSTRIAL AND TEND TO NOT HAVE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS? IS THAT NOT OF HIGH OF CONCERN AS IT WOULD BE AN RA AND A? SO BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPENED, I JUST WANTED TO REMIND YOU OF A FEW THINGS AND THINGS THAT WE CAN DISCUSS AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE DID RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD.
AND WE'VE MADE THE REVISIONS AND ADDITIONS THAT WERE REQUESTED.
YOU ALSO HAVE HANDOUTS TONIGHT FOR SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT ON MONDAY.
WE'LL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING.
AND THEN AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE CAN DISCUSS WHETHER YOU WANT TO INCLUDE ANY ADDITIONAL REVISIONS BASED ON DISCUSSIONS TONIGHT OR FROM YOUR WORK SESSION.
AND WE'LL JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THOSE INCLUDED IN YOUR MOTION, IF YOU SO DESIRE.
AT THIS TIME, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ON THE ORDINANCE TEXT BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPENED.
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION ARE ANY OF OUR CURRENT SUBSTATIONS IN THE M AREA? THE ONLY ONE THAT I THINK MAYBE WOULD BE THE WEST QUAKER ROAD.
IS THAT M? FINE STREET. FINE STREET AS WELL.
I'M JUST CURIOUS. YOU EARLIER MENTIONED THAT THEY'RE USUALLY VERY CLOSE TO OUR SUBSTATIONS. YES.
SO JUST TRYING TO DETERMINE THE IMPACT OF HOW MANY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WOULD BE IN AN M ZONE THERE. IF THE SUBSTATIONS THAT YOU HAVE REFERENCED HAVE A FOOTPRINT LARGE ENOUGH FOR THE BATTERY STORAGE FACILITY TO BE WITHIN THE SUBSTATION, WOULD THEY STILL
[00:25:05]
HAVE TO MEET THE FIVE ACRE REQUIREMENT? IF THEY'RE ON A LOT THAT IS ALREADY LESS THAN FIVE ACRES UNLESS YOU SPECIFY THAT THERE'S A MINIMUM FIVE ACRE AND THAT WAS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.DO YOU WANT TO SPECIFY FIVE ACRES OR DO YOU WANT TO GO WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT? BECAUSE IN RA AND A CURRENTLY LOT SIZES ARE A MINIMUM FIVE ACRES, BUT THAT COULD CHANGE IN THE FUTURE.
SO FOR THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE, DO YOU WANT TO SPECIFY FIVE ACRES IN RA AND A 1 OR LEAVE IT TO THE UNDERLYING DISTRICT? SO WE HAVE ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT WELL RA AND A WILL BE FIVE ACRES.
WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED RIGHT NOW.
BUT DO WE WANT TO SPECIFICALLY SAY FIVE ACRES FOR ALL PROJECTS.
NOW, THE FOOTPRINT MAY NOT BE.
I WOULD ASSUME THEY WERE FIVE ACRES.
SO IF YOU GO BACK TO THE CHART.
I'M SORRY. WE HAVE ONE THREE ACRE SITE.
WE HAVE A ONE ACRE AND A TWO ACRE.
THE OTHERS ARE OVER FIVE ACRES.
SO, YES, THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE NOT FIVE ACRES.
IN TALKING WITH ODEC ABOUT WHAT THEY MAY WANT TO DO WITH PRINCE GEORGE ELECTRIC AND JUST TALKING ABOUT THIS IN GENERAL.
IF THEY HAVE A SITE THAT IS NOT LARGE ENOUGH FOR THEIR SUBSTATION AND A BATTERY STORAGE, THEY ARE LOOKING TO EITHER ACQUIRE MORE PROPERTY OR RENT PROPERTY FROM AN ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER AND MAKE A LARGER COMPOUND.
OK. SO THERE'S ACTUALLY SOME FOOTPRINT ISSUES THAT THEY MAY HAVE ON A VERY SMALL SITE.
AND AT LEAST THE THREE OR FOUR, WHICH ARE CURRENTLY GREATER THAN FIVE ACRES.
YES. IT WOULD BE AND THEIR FOOTPRINT WAS LARGE ENOUGH THAT THEY HAD ROOM WITHIN THAT 5 ACRES. YEAH. THAT PRESUMABLY PUT IT INTO THEIR SUBSTATION FENCE.
THEY WILL PROBABLY EXPAND THE FENCE.
YOU'RE SAYING THE FENCE PROBABLY DOES NOT COVER ALL OF THEIR ACREAGE THAT THEY OWN.
RIGHT. THE ONLY FENCED AREA IS AROUND THE SUBSTATIONS.
OKAY THANK YOU . IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIRMAN. YOU DO.
DID YOU SAY CHESTERFIELD HAS ONE OF THESE? IN YOUR PACKET, IN THE MATERIAL BEHIND TAB FIVE.
RIGHT. THERE'S AN ARTICLE THAT JUST CAME OUT LAST WEEK CONCERNING A FACILITY IN CHESTERFIELD THAT'S IN THE WORKS NOW, THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE ONE OF THE LARGEST ONES IN VIRGINIA TO DATE.
[INAUDIBLE] IS LIKE THAT IN OPERATION NOW? NO, IT'S UNDER DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW.
IT'S NOT IN OPERATION YET THAT I'M AWARE OF.
WHAT ZONING IS THAT IN? I DON'T KNOW WHAT ZONING IT'S IN FOR CHESTERFIELD.
I COULD CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THE ARTICLE STATED WHAT ZONING DISTRICT IT WAS IN.
NO, IT WAS YEAH. IT'S JUST IN THE DEVELOPMENT PHASE RIGHT NOW.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY THEY'VE SUBMITTED FOR THEIR CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND WORKING WITH CHESTERFIELD COUNTY ON THEIR PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.
LIST THE ZONING DISTRICT HERE.
SO ARE YOU SAYING IF YOU DO NOT SPECIFY THAT NOW DOWN THE ROAD, YOU MAY HAVE A PROBLEM? UNDERSTAND THAT IF WE DON'T SPECIFY FIVE ACRES SPECIFICALLY IN RA AND A 1, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES COULD CHANGE IN RA AND A DOWN THE ROAD.
BUT IN HERE SOMEWHERE IT SAID SOMETHING ABOUT LIKE THE M OR WHATEVER.
[00:30:01]
LOT COVERAGE. SO MY RECOMMENDATION, AFTER THE DISCUSSION WE HAD MONDAY NIGHT WOULD BE TO PUT A FIVE ACRE SPECIFIC FOR RA AND A 1 AND NOT AN ACREAGE REQUIREMENT FOR THE M USES.I WOULD ALSO RECOMMEND THAT WE HAVE THE 20 DBA FOR RA AND A 1 AND SOMETHING DIFFERENT, POSSIBLY 60 OR HIGHER FOR THE M USES.
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT, THE M USES ARE NOT SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL AND A USES.
SO AND THE EXPECTATION IN THE M USE AREA IS THAT THE NOISE IS LOUDER AND THE NOISE IS LOUDER. WE CAN GO OUT THERE AND AND DEMONSTRATE THAT.
SO THE 20 DBA AT PROPERTY LINE WOULD BE A LITTLE CUMBERSOME FOR AN M USE AND UNUSUAL FOR AN M USE ZONE BUT DEFINITELY RECOMMENDED FOR THE RA AND A.
LIKE ON HERE WHERE MIDDLE ROAD IS 2.11 ACRES.
THAT IS A, IS THAT AN RA ZONE? RE ACTUALLY.
MISSY PULLED THAT REZONE IN TODAY.
I DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT IN YOUR PACKET.
SO IN THAT CASE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A FIVE ACRE LOT TO PUT IT ON? YEAH.
IT'S NOT PERMITTED IN SO NO, THEY WOULD HAVE TO REZONE IT BACK TO RA.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, BEING A PUBLIC HEARING, I HEREBY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FOR BATTERY STORAGE.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
IT'S 210 RANDOLPH CIRCLE IN ASHLAND, VIRGINIA.
SO. GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
I JUST SAID MY NAME IS PAUL COUSINS.
I AM A PERMITTING SPECIALIST WITH ECOPLEXUS.
ECOPLEXUS IS AN INDUSTRY LEADER IN DEVELOPMENT OF RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS FOR COMMERCIAL GOVERNMENT AND UTILITY MARKETS.
I'M LOCATED IN RICHMOND AND I MANAGE OUR PORTFOLIO FOR THE SOUTHEAST.
ECOPLEXUS IS CURRENTLY WORKING TO DEVELOP SOLAR FACILITIES AS WELL AS STANDALONE BATTERY STORAGE IN PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
AS YOU KNOW, THE STATE IS A FRONTRUNNER IN STANDALONE STORAGE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF 3.1 GIGAWATTS TO BE INSTALLED BY 2035.
WE'RE ONE OF THE MANY DEVELOPERS LOOKING TO HELP DOMINION AND THE STATE REACH THAT GOAL.
STANDALONE BATTERY STORAGE IS A RAPIDLY GROWING NEW TECHNOLOGY.
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR MUNICIPALITIES TO ADOPT NEW ORDINANCES TO KEEP UP WITH THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT. WE'RE GRATEFUL TO BE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS, AND WE PRIDE OURSELVES IN BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT WE INVEST IN.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE DO HAVE A FEW COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.
OUR BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF OUR COMMENTS WERE SHARED A MINUTE AGO.
WE SUBMITTED THEM A LITTLE BIT AGO AS WELL IN A MORE DETAILED VERSION.
SO BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE, A 100 FOOT SETBACK FROM OUR PROPERTY LINES WOULD BE VERY RESTRICTIVE AND SEVERELY LIMIT STANDALONE STORAGE DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTY.
THE CURRENT NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION 855 STANDARD FOR THE INSTALLATION OF STATIONARY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS SET BACK REQUIREMENTS RECOMMENDS A TEN FOOT SETBACK FROM LOT LINES AND PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY.
THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE REQUIRES STORAGE PROJECTS TO BE SITED IN THE M 1 THROUGH 3 AS WELL AS A AND RA ZONES.
THESE FACILITIES WILL BE SITED IN MOSTLY INDUSTRIAL AREAS AND WILL BE HARMONIOUS WITH THE EXISTING USES OF THESE ZONES.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE WOULD STILL RECOMMEND THAT THE ORDINANCE REQUIRE A TIER TWO BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM TO COMPLY WITH THE SETBACKS OF THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT, NOT THE 100 FOOT SETBACKS.
WE BELIEVE IT WOULD BE VERY RESTRICTING TO DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTY.
WE DID HAVE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THE NOISE THAT IS A LITTLE BIT LESS OF A I GUESS
[00:35:05]
DETRIMENT TO DEVELOPMENT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND FROM NEIGHBORING SITES.BUT I DO AGREE THAT 20 DECIBELS IN A MUNICIPAL OR INDUSTRIAL AREA IS PRETTY RESTRICTIVE.
I AGREE WITH THE NOTION THAT IT SHOULD BE SEPARATE FOR THE INDUSTRIAL ZONES, MAYBE UP TO 40 OR 50.
I THINK 20 DECIBELS IS LIKE A LIBRARY OR WHISPERING IS THE WHAT THE DESCRIPTION IS FROM THE EPA. LIKE I SAID, WE SUBMITTED SOME FORMAL COMMENTS WITH SOME GRAPHS AND SOME MORE EXAMPLES EARLIER TO THE COUNTY.
I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS DISCUSSION AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU'LL HAVE ABOUT STANDALONE STORAGE AND OUR PLANS IN THE COUNTY.
WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF SITE LAID OUT RIGHT NOW.
WE ARE LOOKING AT SEVERAL LOCATIONS AND OUR OPTIONS WITH POWER COMPANIES AND OFF TAKES.
ARE YOU INVOLVED? YOUR COMPANY INVOLVED WITH CHESTERFIELD? WE DO NOT HAVE ANY IN CHESTERFIELD RIGHT NOW.
WE'RE LOOKING AT A COUPLE IN THE CITY OF HOPEWELL AND THEN ONE HERE IN PRINCE GEORGE.
[INAUDIBLE] WITH IN AN RA DISTRICT, A 100 FOOT SETBACK WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO YOU? THERE'S NOT A LOT OF AVAILABLE PARCELS THAT ARE CLOSE ENOUGH TO EXISTING TRANSMISSION WHERE WE FEEL WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DEVELOP WHEN GIVEN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES.
A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS WOULD NEED TO BE, WE WOULD ALSO NEED TO DEVELOP A SWITCHING STATION TO CONNECT INTO THE SUBSTATION.
SO THAT TAKES UP A LOT OF SPACE AS WELL.
IT'S NOT ALWAYS JUST THE COMPONENTS OF THE BATTERY AS WELL AS ANY WETLANDS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT COULD BE.
ACRE LOT, THAT'S A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL AREA.
YES, IT IS. THESE PROJECTS ARE PRETTY BIG.
AND WE TYPICALLY THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE A CABINET BASED DEVELOPMENT.
WE CAN DO IN BUILDING I KNOW THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSIONS OF BUILDING ON TOP, BUT THAT'S A LOT MORE DIFFICULT IN TERMS OF FIRE PROTECTION AND PLANNING.
SO IT'S, WE HAD OUR ATTORNEYS REVIEW IT AND OUR DEVELOPMENT FOLKS REVIEW IT.
AND THE 100 FOOT WOULD DEFINITELY BE RESTRICTIVE IN TERMS OF WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT IN THIS COUNTY. IS THERE A LIMIT BETWEEN THE AMOUNT OF DISTANCE THERE, ANY TYPE OF SPECIFIC LIMIT AS TO HOW CLOSE IT CAN BE? THE ACTUAL [INAUDIBLE]. SO IT'S GENERALLY IT'S JUST THE CLOSER, THE BETTER.
YOU CAN FIND EASEMENTS AND BUILD [INAUDIBLE] LINE AS FAR AS YOU CAN.
YOU CAN BUILD TRANSMISSION LINE TO THE SUBSTATION, BUT THAT GETS REALLY EXPENSIVE REALLY QUICKLY. SO AS A DEVELOPER, YOU PREFER TO BE AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THAT SUBSTATION AND TRANSMISSION LINE. WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN US SAYING YOU HAVE TO HAVE FIVE ACRES BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS IS NOT WHAT YOU MAY NEED.
WHAT WOULD BE THE TYPICAL FOOTPRINT OF A BATTERY STORAGE FACILITY? WHERE THE AGREEMENT THAT YOU HAVE WITH THE UTILITY, HOW MUCH YOU'RE LOOKING TO STORE.
I THINK TWO ACRES, THREE ACRES OF JUST BATTERY DEVELOPMENT OF THE ACTUAL BATTERY.
AND THEN YOU HAVE TO BUILD THE SWITCHING STATION AS WELL.
IT WILL BE TIGHT IN A FIVE ACRE PARCEL AND OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE BIGGER PARCELS AND IT IS POSSIBLE TO ADD MORE LAND.
BUT THAT CAN BE DIFFICULT AS WELL, FINDING SPECIFICALLY LAND AROUND SUBSTATIONS AND TRANSMISSION LINES.
SO MY THOUGHT IS, I KNOW SEVERAL OF OUR SUBSTATIONS ARE VERY CLOSE TO THE ROADS.
I'M ASSUMING SINCE YOU'RE WORKING WITH DOMINION, THE SITE THAT YOU WOULD BE CONSIDERING WOULD BE THE MIDDLE ROAD TWO LOCATION THAT DOMINION HAS IN THE COUNTY? I'M NOT I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFICS OF WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT SIGHTING.
I KNOW IT'S A HANDFUL OF PROJECTS. I'M JUST CURIOUS IF WE KNEW FOR SURE WAS THAT HOW MUCH OF A SETBACK IT HAS? IF YOU NEED TO BE CLOSE TO THE SUBSTATION.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD ANYBODY DO FEASIBILITY REVIEWS ON DIFFERENT STATIONS, AND THAT WOULD PRETTY MUCH BE UP TO THE POWER COMPANY TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHETHER THAT SITE WAS FEASIBLE. OK. THAT'S KIND OF.
I NOTICED THAT ONE ALREADY HAS FIVE AND A HALF, AND YOU KNOW 5.6 ACRES.
SO I WOULD ASSUME IF THAT WAS THE SITE, THEY WOULD WANT TO BUILD IT IN PROXIMITY TO WHERE THE CURRENT SUBSTATION IS.
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION AS WELL.
YOU KNOW, THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IN THE RA IS 75 FEET.
SO YOU'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT AN ADDITIONAL 20 THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT ANYWAY.
AND THE 100 FOOT IS ACTUALLY THE MINIMUM SETBACK WE SET FOR OUR SOLARS.
[00:40:07]
IF THEY'RE NEAR RESIDENTIAL, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE A 500 FOOT SETBACK.SO AGAIN, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE 100 FOOT IS WE FEEL VERY APPROPRIATE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANY COMMENTS ON ZOOM? THIS? NO, SIR.
THERE'S NO ONE ON ZOOM RIGHT NOW.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? THERE BEING NO ONE ELSE? I HEREBY CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY DISCUSS AND REVIEW A COUPLE OF THOSE OPTIONS WE WERE DISCUSSING.
OK. IF THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD.
THIS IS THE LIST OF ITEMS THAT WERE DISCUSSED THROUGH OUR WORK SESSION AND THROUGH SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED.
AND IF THE BOARD SO CHOOSES TO INCLUDE THESE ITEMS OR DIRECT STAFF TO REVISE THESE ITEMS, YOU CAN JUST INCLUDE THAT IN YOUR MOTION.
AND WE WILL GET THOSE INCLUDED FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION AS WELL.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THESE CONSIDERATIONS OR DISCUSS ANY OF THEM FURTHER IF NEEDED.
THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS ANYONE? DISCUSSION? ARE WE CORRECT OR AM I CORRECT IN ASSUMING THAT THESE FACILITIES WOULD GO ADJACENT TO EITHER AN EXISTING OR A NEW SUBSTATION? CURRENTLY, THE TECHNOLOGY.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THE TECHNOLOGY IS THERE CURRENTLY, I CAN'T SAY IN THE FUTURE IT MIGHT NOT. BUT CURRENTLY IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE TECHNOLOGY REQUIRES THEM TO BE LOCATED IN NEAR PROXIMITY TO A SUBSTATION.
OKAY. SO THEY COULD BE ON AN ADJACENT PROPERTY.
THEY MIGHT NOT BE ON THE SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY.
AND, OF COURSE, AS TECHNOLOGY EVOLVES, THE BATTERIES WILL GET THE COMPONENTS WILL GET SMALLER AND THE DISTANCE COULD GET GREATER.
THERE BEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR I'LL LEAVE IT TO THE COMMISSIONERS TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OR SO WE SEND IT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
BEFORE I MAKE THE MOTION TO WHAT WOULD DO.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY AND A LOT OF MOVING TARGETS IN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AND WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THOSE TARGETS ARE.
SO IF I MAKE A MOTION TO SEND IT TO THE BOARD, WELL THEN THE BOARD WILL ADDRESS SOME OF THESE THINGS AND MAKE THE DECISION OR SEND IT BACK TO US.
AND I GUESS WE'RE NOT GOING TO KNOW ANY MORE TOMORROW THAN WE KNOW TODAY.
SO WE NEED TO GET ON WITH IT AND LET THIS THING DEVELOP.
EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? OKAY. MR. CHAIRMAN. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RE FORWARD REQUEST OA22-01 TO THE BOARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE REVISED SECTION 7E
[00:45:03]
NOISE. THE AVERAGE NOISE GENERATED TO BE 20 DBA AT THE PROPERTY LINE.YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE M DISTRICT? HUH? YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE M DISTRICT.
OH. PROPERTY [LAUGHTER]. YOU WANT TO AMEND YOUR MOTION.
AMEND MY MOTION? OKAY THANK YOU.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO AMEND MY MOTION TO FORWARD REQUEST OA22-01 TO THE BOARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.
THAT WE REVISE SECTION 7E NOISE TO SAY THAT THE AVERAGE NOISE GENERATED TO BE 20 DBA AT THE PROPERTY LINE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY AND RA AND A DISTRICTS AND 60 DBA AT PROPERTY LINE IN M DISTRICTS.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. MOTION BY MR. SIMMONS. SECOND BY MR. JOYNER. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[COMMUNICATIONS]
NEXT ITEM IS COMMUNICATIONS.ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN BRESKO, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, MR. WHITTEN. COMMUNICATIONS TONIGHT, STARTING WITH ACTIONS OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FOR NEXT MONTH APRIL.
THERE IS ONE CASE WHICH IS SCHEDULED AT THIS TIME.
IT'S A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FOR A PRIVATE ANIMAL BOARDING PLACE, WHICH IS 4 OR MORE DOGS ON LESS THAN ONE ACRE.
AND THAT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR 6:30 P.M.
ON MONDAY, THE 25TH, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE THE SAME DATE AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION FOR APRIL, WHICH IS SCHEDULED FOR 5:30.
SO KNOWING THAT WE HAVE THREE CASES TO DISCUSS DURING THE WORK SESSION, ONE BEING OLD BUSINESS AND TWO BEING SOLAR PROJECTS.
STAFF LOOKING FORWARD, LOOKING AHEAD TO THIS WAS THINKING THAT 45 MINUTES BETWEEN 5:30 AND 6:30 WITH SOME WIDTHS, TIME BETWEEN MAY NOT BE ENOUGH TO COVER THOSE CASES ADEQUATELY.
SO FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, WE HAVE A PROPOSED MOTION TO ADJOURN IN FRONT OF YOU WHEN THAT TIME COMES. IF YOU WANTED TO CONSIDER CHANGING THE MEETING LOCATION OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING FOR APRIL TO DOWNSTAIRS IN THE KINES BREAK ROOM THAT WOULD ALLOW THE STAFF TO SET UP THIS MEETING ROOM FOR THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING AND NOT HAVE A CONFLICT IF ONE DOES ARISE IN TERMS OF TIMING.
SO MOVING ON TO THE ACTIONS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
ON TUESDAY NIGHT THIS WEEK, THEY APPROVED THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST OF BRIGHTVIEW FOR THE SPECIAL CARE HOSPITAL AND THEY APPROVED THE REZONING AMENDMENT REQUEST OF SI VIRGINIA REGARDING THE CHANGE OF CONDITIONS FOR AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE PROPERTY.
AND FOR UPCOMING CASES FOR APRIL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
AND AS I MENTIONED, THERE ARE THREE AND ONE OF THEM IS OLD BUSINESS REGARDING THE FUNG ASSEMBLY HALL. AND THEN THERE WOULD BE TWO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR SOLAR PROJECTS.
THE FIRST BEING POWELL CREEK IS THE NAME FOR THAT PROJECT AND THE OTHER BEING KRENICKY, WHICH IS THE NAME OF THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THAT PROPERTY.
[00:50:03]
SO THAT COVERS THE COMMUNICATIONS.AGAIN, IF YOU WANTED TO CHANGE THE MEETING LOCATION FOR THE WORK SESSION, THEN THERE'S A PROPOSED MOTION FOR YOU TO READ SO THAT YOU'VE STATED OUT LOUD WHAT THE NEXT MEETING, TIME, DATE AND LOCATION WILL BE.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE. UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DISCUSSION? I'M GOING TO ENTERTAINING A MOTION TO ADJOURN. I MOTION WE ADJOURN UNTIL THE PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL, WHICH IS HEREBY SCHEDULED FOR 5:30 P.M.
ON MONDAY, APRIL THE 25TH IN THE KINES MEMORIAL BREAK ROOM, LOCATED ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING.
SECOND. MOTION BY MS. ELDER, SECONDED BY MR. JOYNER. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. MEETING ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.