HADLEY — A stand-alone battery energy storage system will be allowed at a Breckenridge Road gravel pit, despite concerns about the location being in the town’s aquifer protection district and growing unease from those who live in the neighborhood.
In a 4-0 vote with one member absent, the Planning Board Tuesday approved the site plans, the solar project special permit and a business use in aquifer special permit for ZP Battery Devco’s 5-megawatt system.
The eight-battery system will be placed by the company in a nearly 5-acre gravel pit site located above the Zatyrka Park playground.
Board members indicated they had to approve the siting in the agricultural zoning district and aquifer protection district, as grandfathered under previous town zoning, after the Worcester company filed a lawsuit in Hampshire Superior Court. That lawsuit arose after the board rejected previous plans in January 2025, and the company has argued the board’s decision was legally untenable and “unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious.”
While Planning Board member Mark Dunn said he couldn’t in good conscience vote in favor of the project due to the potential damage to the aquifer should there be an accident involving the batteries, he was warned by his colleagues that the special permit needed four votes. Another failed vote would lead to further litigation.
“Under duress, I will vote yes,” Dunn said.
“This has been a tough one, but we are where we are,” said Board Chairman James Maksimoski.
The Planning Board began the new hearing over the summer on what is a nearly identical proposal from Zero-Point Development. Since then, the board raised concerns over whether the state would allow it to reject the project under the Dover Amendment, which exempts certain land uses from local zoning based on their impact on public health, safety and the environment. Part of that argument stems from the fact that more than half of the energy to be stored by the battery won’t come from renewable energy sources.
Several residents joined the call, asking questions about what avenues exist for neighbors to stop the project.
“Any issue of toxic discharge into the aquifer protection area is a problem,” said Greg Owen, of Breckenridge Road.
Brian Carroll, also of Breckenridge Road, said residents need to reach out to state legislators and tell them that small communities shouldn’t be subsidizing the energy needs of those in the Boston area.
“These are being built, like with the Quabbin, for the cities to have energy when they need it,” Carroll said.
Kristi Nelson, of Sylvia Heights, asked if there is a way to appeal the decision. Planners said the decision will be filed soon and abutters will be notified when that happens.
Planning Board Clerk William Dwyer said there didn’t appear to be a legal basis to deny the latest application, explaining that three of the four grounds which the board used to turn down the project have been undermined by the state with its modified regulations.
A final reason for rejecting the project, Dwyer said, would be if such a system could pose risks to the aquifer, a possibility the developer denied. The town now has to meet the burden of proof that there is a threat.
“Now, we’re in the untenable position of having to prove they will harm the aquifer, which we cannot do,” Dwyer said.
Those who live near the site had also asked the Planning Board to reopen the hearing, which was closed last month, so they could offer input, contending that neighbors and abutters were unaware of the project until seeing posts on social media.
Town counsel, though, told planners the board had no basis for reopening the public hearing. The hearings on the project were legally advertised.
In other business, the board approved new signs for The Home Depot, 350 Russell St., including ones that will go on the store’s facade, and for Hadley Pointe, the 20 North Maple St. nursing home and rehabilitation center.
