BESS Project

Home > Our City > City Departments > Proposed Housing Projects

Battery Energy Storage System — Covina Reliability Project

Proposed project at 522, 534, and 680 Edna Place

The City received an application for a Battery Energy Storage System on industrially zoned Edna Place property. After a multi-year public process, the applicant withdrew its application on October 27, 2026. This page explains what happened, why, and what it means going forward.

Is the Battery Energy Storage System still on track to go before the Covina City Council?

No. On October 27, 2026, the applicant notified the City of Covina that it was withdrawing its application. As a result, the project is not scheduled to go before the City Council, and no City Council hearing is pending.

WHY THE CITY CANNOT SIMPLY STOP OR REDESIGN A QUALIFYING PROJECT

State law has narrowed local discretion — it has not eliminated the City’s duty to review eligibility, enforce objective standards, and protect health and safety.

Objective standards, not subjective preferences: Covina may apply standards that are measurable and verifiable — a stated setback, height limit, or building-code requirement — unless State law grants a waiver or otherwise preempts that standard. General objections that a project is too dense, doesn’t fit neighborhood character, may affect views, or should provide more parking usually are not, by themselves, lawful grounds to deny a qualifying housing development.

STATE LAW	WHAT THE LAW DOES	PRACTICAL EFFECT FOR COVINA
Housing Accountability Act (HAA)	Limits denial or density reduction when a project complies with applicable objective general-plan, zoning and subdivision standards.	Denial generally requires written findings of a specific, adverse public-health or safety impact that cannot feasibly be mitigated; community opposition or generalized traffic concerns do not replace that evidence
SB 330 / Housing Crisis Act	A complete preliminary application generally locks in the ordinances, policies, and standards in effect when submitted, and limits the number of hearings.	The City generally cannot change the rules after filing to reduce units, height, or development capacity for that application.
SB 4 — Faith and Higher Education Lands	Requires ministerial approval of qualifying 100% affordable housing on eligible land owned by a religious institution or nonprofit college.	A qualifying project does not require a discretionary conditional-use permit and is not denied based on subjective neighborhood compatibility.
Density Bonus Law & AB 2097	Density Bonus Law provides added units, concessions, and waivers; AB 2097 generally prohibits minimum parking requirements within ½ mile of a major transit stop.	The City may be unable to require fewer units, a smaller envelope, or more parking where State entitlements or waivers apply.
AB 130 & SB 131 — CEQA Streamlining	AB 130 created a CEQA exemption for qualifying urban infill housing; SB 131 limits review for certain projects that miss an exemption on only one disqualifying condition.	If a project qualifies for an exemption or is ministerial, the City cannot require a traditional EIR merely to delay or reconsider the project.

SUMMARY

The City of Covina received an application for a proposed Battery Energy Storage System, known as the Covina Reliability Project, on industrially zoned property at 522, 534, and 680 Edna Place. Since 2024, the City has considered the proposal through its public land-use process, including a temporary moratorium, a municipal code amendment, three community meetings, environmental review, and Planning Commission hearings. On October 27, 2026, the applicant notified the City that it was withdrawing its application. The project therefore is not moving forward at this time.

Questions and Answers

What was the last action on the application before it was withdrawn?

On June 30, 2026, following a continued public hearing that began June 23, 2026, the Covina Planning Commission recommended that the City Council deny the project as proposed. The recommendation was advisory because the requested Development Agreement would have required City Council action for a final local decision.

Was the project already approved or a foregone conclusion?

No. Filing a development application does not mean a project has been approved. The applicant had the right to submit a proposal and seek review, but the project remained subject to the City’s discretionary review process, environmental review, public comment, Planning Commission consideration, and, if it had proceeded, a City Council public hearing and final decision.

How did the City ensure the public had an opportunity to participate?

The City conducted a multi-year public process that included a temporary moratorium to allow time for study, an amendment to the Municipal Code requiring a Conditional Use Permit for BESS facilities, three community meetings at the Covina Senior Center, mailed notices to nearby properties, circulation of the environmental document for public comment, and public hearings before the Planning Commission.

Why was the applicant allowed to submit the project?

Any person or business has the freedom and right to propose a project and file an application. The City’s role is to review that application under applicable laws and local standards, receive public input, evaluate potential benefits and impacts, and make a decision through the established public process. The right to apply is not a guarantee of approval.

What does the withdrawal mean?

The withdrawal means that the current City application will not proceed to the City Council at this time. The City has not approved the project, and no City Council hearing is scheduled.

Could the applicant submit a new application in the future?

Yes. Withdrawal of the current application does not prevent an applicant from submitting a future proposal. Any future application would be reviewed under the laws, regulations, and City requirements in effect at that time and would be subject to the applicable public notice and review process.

Can the applicant seek relief or permitting from the State?

The applicant may pursue any state relief or permitting option that may be available under state law. This may include the California Energy Commission’s Opt-In Certification Program under Assembly Bill 205 if the applicant and project qualify. Any state process would be separate from the City application that has now been withdrawn.

What would happen if a future proposal came back to the City?

The City Process

The City of Covina is proud and confident that it has due process in place to give everyone a chance to express their opinions, whether in support of or against a proposal, while the City also weighs health and safety and the benefit or impact on the community. In this case, the process prevailed; the people were heard, and the outcome reflects that public process.

Project Timeline

Date	Milestone
June 24, 2024	Preliminary application review submitted by applicant.
August 20, 2024	City issued Pre-Application 24-3 response letter.
May 1, 2025	Formal application submitted by RWE Clean Energy, Site Plan Review 25-81.
May 6, 2025	City Council approved a 45-day moratorium on BESS facilities.
June 7, 2025	City Council extended the moratorium by 10 months and 15 days, through May 4, 2026.
September 2, 2025	City Council amended Covina Municipal Code Chapter 17.54.030 to require a Conditional Use Permit for BESS land use.
November 5, 2025	First community meeting at the Covina Senior Center; notices mailed to properties within 1,000 feet.
November 25, 2025	Application amended to add a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance for perimeter wall height.
January 5–26, 2026	Draft CEQA document, Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, circulated for public review and comment.
February 25, 2026	Second community meeting at the Covina Senior Center.
March 24, 2026	Third community meeting at the Covina Senior Center.
June 23, 2026	Planning Commission public hearing opened and was continued to June 30.
June 30, 2026	Planning Commission recommended that the City Council deny the project, Resolution 2026-016 PC.
October 27, 2026	City received notice from the applicant that it had decided to withdraw the application for the project.