A large-scale battery energy storage system is being proposed in the city of Dunkirk.

If approved, it would be the largest battery storage system in the county.

During Tuesday’s Chautauqua County Planning Board meeting, board members reviewed initial plans for a 250 megawatt grid-connected battery storage system, to be placed on West Seventh Street in the city.

The property for the project is about 16 vacant acres, zoned M-1 for manufacturing and is within 500 feet of Brigham Road.

In its application is a three-page letter from attorney Daniel Brennan on behalf of GCI Lighthouse Energy Storage, LLC, the developer. In it he writes, “The project represents a significant improvement to Dunkirk’s electrical infrastructure and will provide multiple benefits, including substantial financial advantages to the city without necessitating the use of municipal services. By modernizing the electrical grid, the project will support the city’s ability to meet increasing residential and commercial energy demands, positioning Dunkirk to compete effectively in the future.”

According to the application, the project will be a simple layout of battery containers connected to a new substation. The battery cells are contained in racks arranged within containers (each about the size of a shipping container) on a concrete slab. The battery containers are separated according to the specifications of the manufacturer and national design standards for safety. The containers are not buildings and are designed so that they cannot be occupied or entered.

The site will include an internal road system and an access driveway to Brigham Road for regular maintenance.

According to the application, the project will be controlled remotely. “It will not generate traffic or require parking, which minimizes the impact on the neighborhood. There will be periodic visits to the site for repairs and maintenance,” Brennan wrote.

Brennan argued this is an ideal location because the property is surrounded by railroad tracks to the north, south, and west, with existing transmission lines bordering the project to the east. “The project is consistent with the neighborhood’s existing character, which includes electrical and transportation infrastructure, manufacturing, and commercial uses,” he wrote.

The county planning board members had plenty of questions.

During the discussion, it was noted that there is no battery energy storage system of this size currently in Chautauqua County.

Planning Board Chairman Doug Bowen said the city of Dunkirk does not have any zoning for battery storage systems. He thinks the city should issue a moratorium on battery energy solar projects until its zoning is updated.

Courtney Domst with the county Department of Planning said Dunkirk is considering this project electrical infrastructure, which is a permitted use in that area of the city.

Planning Board member Amiee Rogers noted the application does not have a decommissioning plan in place for when the project is no longer in use.

Rebecca Wurster with the county Department of Planning said that a decommissioning plan could be a stipulation added by the county planning board in the future.

Bowen said he believes a full environmental impact study should be required for the project.

He also is concerned about safety. “A 250 megawatt battery energy storage system is huge. I’m curious to know if the fire commissioners or the fire chief of the city of Dunkirk have been reached out for comment. Is the developer going to provide specialized equipment to handle any emergency that could come up?” he said.

Bowen said if there happens to be a fire there, he is worried massive evacuations would need to take place. “You’d be evacuating the city of Dunkirk,” he said.

Bowen said he’s familiar with battery energy storage systems because they were proposed in Ripley when he was the town supervisor. He noted their purpose is to store energy generated from things like wind and solar projects when that energy is not immediately used.

At Tuesday’s meeting, county planning board members initially voted against the project, stating there were a number of questions that needed to be addressed.

On Wednesday, the county’s Department of Planning sent out an email to the board members and to the OBSERVER stating that vote was premature because this was a preliminary site plan and not a final site plan review.

If the county planning board does vote against the final site plan review in the future, it doesn’t necessarily stop the project. Instead, it would mean that a super-majority vote would be required by the Dunkirk City Planning Board to move ahead without county approval.

The city planning board, according to its website, has five members. Four yes votes would be required for a super-majority vote, instead of simply three.

Wurster said Dunkirk Planning and Development Director Vince DeJoy and the developer will be invited to a future county planning board meeting to discuss the project further before a vote takes place.