An Act to amend and reenact § 15.2-2316.9 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Article 7.3 of Chapter 22 of Title 15.2 a section numbered 15.2-2316.10, relating to siting of battery energy storage projects; commercial solar photovoltaic generation facilities; permitted accessory use.
HB891 amends Virginia’s local land-use rules for solar and battery storage projects. It clarifies that, for solar and energy storage projects covered by the state’s siting-agreement process, applicants still must obtain any other required federal, state, and local approvals, but a local governing body’s approval of a siting agreement will count as consistent with the locality’s comprehensive plan. The bill also provides that the absence of a siting agreement may be considered in land-use decisions, but cannot be the sole basis for denying approvals.
The bill’s main substantive change is to create a new rule for battery energy storage projects associated with approved solar facilities. A battery storage project is deemed a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts if it is located on the same parcel as an approved solar special exception and its storage capacity does not exceed 100 percent of the solar facility’s nameplate generating capacity. In that case, it does not need a separate special exception or other local land-use approval. The bill preserves compliance obligations for safety, fire, and environmental codes, and it states that existing financial terms, payment obligations, and tax exemptions tied to the solar project do not automatically extend to or change the battery storage project.
HB891 changes Title 15.2 of the Code of Virginia by narrowing local discretion over certain battery energy storage projects paired with approved solar facilities and by clarifying the effect of siting agreements on land-use review. It creates a statutory accessory-use classification for qualifying battery storage projects, limits the need for additional local zoning approvals, and preserves local enforcement authority over safety and code compliance. The bill also specifies that projects with interconnection requests filed before July 1, 2030, are generally governed by local ordinances in effect on July 1, 2026, except as modified by the new section.
The available record shows the bill was enacted as Chapter 1076, which suggests it had sufficient support to pass and become law. Because no committee transcripts or vote tallies are provided, there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the supplied materials. The statutory language indicates a policy preference for facilitating solar-adjacent battery storage development while retaining local oversight for safety and code enforcement.
The main potential point of contention is the bill’s reduction of local land-use control over battery energy storage projects tied to approved solar facilities. Localities may view the accessory-use designation and elimination of a separate special exception as limiting zoning discretion, while developers are likely to support the streamlined approval process. Another possible issue is the bill’s treatment of siting-agreement terms and tax exemptions, which are preserved for the solar project but not automatically imposed on the battery storage project, potentially raising questions about how local financial commitments and regulatory conditions apply to mixed solar-storage developments.