> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://pembrokecitizenjournal.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Planning Board Sends BESS Bylaw to Town Meeting With Smaller Setbacks - URL: https://pembrokecitizenjournal.com/town-hall/planning-board-public-hearing/ - Published: 2026-10-11T12:00:59.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-11T22:31:12.000Z - Description: The bylaw would be Pembroke’s first zoning rules for battery storage, and the version posted for the Oct. 20 Town Meeting lists two different capacity thresholds for its middle tier. - Author: Will Tavares - Tags: Town Hall, Land Use The Planning Board voted October 5, 2026 to amend its draft battery energy storage system (BESS) bylaw and submit it to the October 20 Fall Special Town Meeting. The amendments reduce the required distance from neighboring residential property to 150 feet and drop several provisions town counsel KP Law had questioned. The version posted for town meeting differs from the hearing discussion in places. It lists two different capacity thresholds for the bylaw’s middle tier. It also eases permitting in the town’s industrial districts, a change members did not discuss at the hearing. The bylaw, which appears on the town meeting warrant as Article 4, would be Pembroke's first zoning rules specific to battery storage systems. If approved by town meeting, the bylaw will be sent to the Massachusetts Attorney General (AG) for review and approval. The AG's Municipal Law Unit is responsible for reviewing all adoptions and amendments to town general bylaws or zoning bylaws, deciding whether the proposed amendments are consistent with the state constitution and state law. PCJ [previously reported](https://pembrokecitizenjournal.com/town-hall/public-hearing-set-for-proposed-bess-bylaw/) on town counsel's comments on the draft. ### Readiness for town meeting and disagreements in the working group The working group drafting the bylaw consisted of Vice Chair Alysha Siciliano-Perry, board member Stephan Roundtree, Fire Chief Jason Viveiros and resident Susan Bollinger. Siciliano-Perry and Roundtree said the group had last met about four weeks before the hearing. The group had been waiting on town counsel’s comments on the draft, which the Planning Board received September 9. Siciliano-Perry presented the working group’s latest draft, which she said included some of town counsel’s wording changes, and reported on the group's progress. She said the group couldn’t agree on setbacks and that, in her view, the bylaw wasn’t ready. "Some of us are looking at it pragmatically to get it through as a zoning bylaw but there are emotions involved and so we haven’t been able to come to a consensus on dimensional," she said, speaking specifically to the "Dimensional and Design Requirements" section of the bylaw. This section establishes setbacks and other key site features such as emergency access requirements, natural screening and mitigation for loss of forest habitat and historic resources. Board members worried about sending a restrictive bylaw to town meeting, since a bylaw rejected by the AG would have to go back through a public hearing and another town meeting vote after modification. Siciliano-Perry said that the examples that she had reviewed of denied bylaws from other towns in the state had been denied for BESS setback requirements not being consistent with other setbacks established in the zoning bylaws. In its comments on the draft, town counsel wrote that the draft’s setbacks were considerably larger than those in the state’s model bylaw and the town’s solar bylaw. Siciliano-Perry told the board that "we're not ready for town meeting in my personal opinion because we can't come to a consensus on it." Chair Andy Wandell echoed the sentiment, saying "with the issues that have come up, I'm not sure we're ready." Bollinger, a working group member, said that a final version reflecting town counsel's comments was not ready: "I think we were still in discussions. We just haven't completed the conversation." Bollinger said that she had met with the fire chief prior to the meeting without other working group members due to scheduling constraints and that they both had questions in response to town counsel's comments. Siciliano-Perry said that those questions had not been sent to town counsel for review. Wandell questioned the scope of questions proposed to town counsel, and said that "we're not going to debate setbacks with town counsel. They're not going to give us a determination of what our setback should be... town counsel is going to give us advice on the legality of the language" before saying that the meeting needed to move along. During public comment, Select Board member Steve Ciciotti, speaking as a resident, argued for sending the bylaw to town meeting now. If the AG rejected it, he said, the town would not be starting over and would know what to fix. “If it gets rejected, we would then have clear language at least to say, okay, we went for this, we didn’t get it, they rejected us on these bases,” he said. After public comment, Wandell said that he felt that the board should follow town counsel's recommendations and approve the bylaw for town meeting with those amendments. Siciliano-Perry said she had prepared a copy based on town counsel's comments to the draft and would send them to the Planning Board staff by the next day. The board voted without opposition to make the amendments reflecting town counsel's comments and dimensional requirements discussed at the meeting to the bylaw and submit it for town meeting. ### What the board settled on The board agreed to replace the proposed 300-foot setback with existing district setbacks. Additionally, a 150-foot setback is required in any BESS installations that directly abut an active residential use or a Residence A district lot line, based on the town’s existing industrial-to-residential buffer. The state’s model bylaw requires battery storage systems to meet each district’s setbacks, with an optional 50-foot setback where a lot abuts a residential district. The board followed town counsel’s recommendations to remove the noise and wetlands sections. Counsel had questioned how a noise limit would be enforced and noted that wetlands fall under the Conservation Commission’s jurisdiction. The board did not choose to change the draft's three tiers of BESS systems despite town counsel’s suggestion that it could add a fourth tier for systems over 100 MWh. Members said that a Tier 4 BESS is regulated by the state Energy Facilities Siting Board, outside of their control, and Bollinger said that the fire chief noted there likely isn't a location in the town that could site a system that large. The state's [model bylaw](https://www.mass.gov/doc/doer-draft-battery-energy-storage-systems-bess-model-bylaw/download) classifies Tier 2 BESS systems as being between 250 kilowatt-hours (kWh) and 10 megawatt-hours (MWh), where the draft reviewed at the meeting set Tier 2 (Medium-Scale) BESS systems at between 250 kWh and 5 MWh. Siciliano-Perry said the working group wanted to keep 5 MWh as the upper limit for Tier 2: "I think if we were to stick a 10 \[MWh system\] in there, that would be a large nuisance in our smaller neighborhoods." She also said that other towns' bylaws had been approved when setting 5 MWh as the upper limit for medium-scale systems. The board also agreed on a larger 300-foot setback to the sides and rear from schools, nursing homes, hospitals and other facilities where evacuation would take place in the event of an emergency, which Siciliano-Perry said the fire chief had proposed. While this is further than existing setbacks, Wandell said it was reasonable to request that distance due to the evacuation considerations. ### What the warrant article shows **Tier threshold** The [posted bylaw](https://www.pembroke-ma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8241/PEMB-Oct-2026-STM-Warrant-Supplement-w-BESS-bylaw?bidId=) defines Tier 2 (Medium-Scale) systems as those between 250 kWh and 5 MWh, the threshold Siciliano-Perry said the working group wanted to keep. In a table later in the bylaw, Tier 2 (Medium Scale) systems are listed as between 250 kWh and 10 MWh instead. The table sets where each tier is allowed and what zoning and permitting requirements each tier of system requires depending on the zoning district. Under the bylaw definitions section, a 7 MWh stand-alone system in Business A is Tier 3 and needs a special permit. Under the table headers, the same system is Tier 2 and needs only site plan review. **Industrial districts** The posted version allows Tier 2 (Medium-Scale) systems by right in Industrial Districts A and B, where the draft filed in September required site plan review. Tier 2 (Medium-Scale) by right means up to 5 MWh or 10 MWh, depending on which part of the bylaw applies. It requires site plan review rather than a special permit for Tier 3 (Large-Scale) systems there. The bylaw’s safety submissions, including plume modeling and a Fire Department-approved emergency response plan, apply only to projects that go through site plan review or a special permit. **Same-lot separation** Members debated keeping a 100-foot separation between battery equipment and other structures on the same lot or using the 10 feet counsel cited from NFPA 855, without settling on a figure. The posted text sets 20 feet. ### What happens next If town meeting passes the bylaw, the Attorney General's Municipal Law Unit will review it. If the AG's office does not approve, board members said the town would need another public hearing and town meeting vote on the new version. In the meantime, Wandell said that existing zoning and site plan review apply. Every project must also meet NFPA 855 and the state building and fire codes. Ciciotti also asked whether developers generally wait or push forward with passed bylaws pending AG review. "I don't think there's a typical case in that respect. I think that some people go full head in and others would wait and be cautious until they get the final approval," Wandell said. Bollinger is also the only active defendant in a Land Court lawsuit brought by Palmer Management Corporation over a proposed battery storage facility at 48 Schoosett Street, which PCJ [reported on in August](https://pembrokecitizenjournal.com/town-hall/developer-moves-to-end-bess-suit/). Palmer argues she lacked standing to bring the appeal that led the Zoning Board of Appeals to send the project's site plan approval back to the Planning Board on April 13, 2026\. That case is still pending. Fall Special Town Meeting will be held on October 20, 2026, at Pembroke High School. Residents are asked to arrive by 6:30 pm for a prompt 7:00 pm start.