Planning Board approves new site plan for battery project on Lot G; amends permit to limit original approval to Lot F

The Town of Charlton Planning Board on Feb. 19 approved a new site-plan application for an energy storage system proposed for Lot G and voted to amend an existing special permit so the earlier, combined approval now applies only to Lot F.

The action came after a presentation by a representative of ZP Development Company LLC, who said financing prompted the company to split a previously permitted installation into two separately permitted projects. “The idea here is really just to split this project up,” the representative said, explaining the applicant would amend the current special permit to apply only to Lot F and file a complete, separate application for Lot G.

Board members and staff confirmed the changes do not alter the size or technical specifications of the battery systems and that external reviewers had already reviewed the materials submitted for Lot G. Planning staff cited an engineering comment letter from January 6 and recommended that the new Lot G plans be treated as a current plan set.

The board moved, and members voted unanimously, to approve the site-plan application for Lot G “with all the same restrictions and conditions previously approved” for the original project. The board then voted to modify the original, combined permit so it would cover only Lot F, again subject to the standard conditions and any prior requirements still applicable.

Planning staff and the applicant clarified operations and connections during public comment: the two proposed systems will have separate electrical connections and separate access drives, and they are not directly tied to the adjacent solar facility. A resident asked whether lot subdivision or nonconformity would result from the split; the applicant answered the lots are already separate and the subdivision previously completed remains in effect.

The application record includes technical review correspondence from GEI and a letter noting that reviewer Mike Andrade had examined the plans. During public comment a speaker referenced system size: the transcript records “8 containers, 5 megawatts” and a figure of approximately 4,948 kW; the applicant discussed manufacturer variability and said final system configuration depends on chosen equipment. The board kept conditions of approval from the earlier permit in place and required the applicant to return for any outstanding approvals tied to construction, such as required final engineering sign-offs prior to building permit issuance.

Votes at a glance: - Motion: Approve ZP Development Company/CP Battery DevCo site-plan application for Lot G with the same restrictions and prior conditions. Outcome: Approved (unanimous). Motion moved by planning board member (not specified); second not specified. - Motion: Modify original CP Battery DevCo approval so the original special permit covers only Lot F, and accept the new Lot G application as a separate, new approval. Outcome: Approved (unanimous). Motion moved by planning board member (not specified); second not specified.

Clarifying details from the hearing include references to GEI and a January 6 engineering comment letter, separate electrical connections for the two lots, and the applicant’s statement that system size and container counts are consistent with prior submissions. The board noted they will enforce prior permit conditions and require any outstanding construction-level submittals before building permits are issued.

The board’s approvals were procedural — splitting the previously permitted project into two approvals — and did not signal any change to the technical scope as submitted for Lot G. The applicant will proceed under the modified permit for Lot F and the new Lot G approval. The board retained remaining conditions of approval and required the usual follow-up engineering and permitting steps before construction.