Proposed 40-Acre Battery Farm in Coyote Valley

AES is proposing a utility-scale battery storage project called Jewelflower on about 40 acres of privately owned land in San Jose’s Coyote Valley, according to the company and local reports. The Virginia-based developer says the facility would have 350 megawatts of planned capacity and store enough electricity to power the equivalent of more than 262,500 homes for four hours. The proposal has become a flashpoint because the site sits in a part of North Coyote Valley that San Jose has spent years steering toward agriculture and open space rather than industrial development. The Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority voted unanimously on May 28 to oppose the project, and environmental groups, nearby parents and school officials have also objected. (aes.com) The dispute is not over whether California needs battery storage. The California Energy Commission says statewide battery storage capacity rose from 500 megawatts in 2018 to more than 16,900 megawatts by mid-2025, and the state projects 52,000 megawatts will be needed by 2045. The fight is over whether this site, in this valley, should host one of the larger projects now being planned. (greenfoothills.org) ### Where exactly would this go? Coyote Valley is the rural stretch on San Jose’s southern edge between the city and Morgan Hill, and opponents say the proposed site is west of Highway 101 along Bailey Avenue and the Monterey Road corridor in North Coyote Valley. The Open Space Authority said the project would place hundreds of containerized lithium-ion battery units on prime farmland surrounded by protected open space. (energy.ca.gov) Green Foothills said the site lies in the Coyote Valley wildlife corridor connecting the Santa Cruz Mountains and the Diablo Range. The group said the land has long been used for crops including pumpkins and sweet corn. ### Why are local officials and advocates pushing back? The Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority said on May 29 that the project is “simply in the wrong place,” quoting board chair Kathy Sutherland after the board’s vote the previous day. (msn.com) General Manager Andrea Mackenzie said the agency supports renewable energy and storage, but said such projects should be sited away from irreplaceable natural and agricultural lands. (greenfoothills.org) San Jose’s broader land-use posture in the area helps explain the reaction. The city’s Coyote Valley Corridor Study page says the City Council in November 2021 directed work on future uses compatible with agriculture and open space, and the city later paused that study on June 9, 2025 because of budget constraints. Advocacy groups say industrial development in the area has been barred since the 2021 rezoning. (openspaceauthority.org) ### Why are parents focused on the school across the road? The Charter School of Morgan Hill sits across Monterey Road from the proposed site, according to Green Foothills and the Morgan Hill Times. Principal Susan Pfefferlen said in March that the project raised “serious safety and environmental concerns” because of its proximity to the campus and limited evacuation options. (sanjoseca.gov) Parents and school officials have pointed to battery fire risks, especially after the January 2025 fire at Moss Landing. The San Jose Fire Department told the Morgan Hill Times that any proposed battery installation would have to meet testing and ventilation standards intended to prevent a fire in one unit from spreading to others. ### How is AES trying to get this approved? (greenfoothills.org) AES says Jewelflower is still in development and lists a timeline of 2020 to 2027 for development, siting and permitting, followed by construction in 2028 and operations in 2029. The company says it expects the project to generate $193 million in economic activity over its life and $156 million in tax revenue for San Jose, Santa Clara County and local schools. (morganhilltimes.com) The key procedural issue is the California Energy Commission’s Opt-In Certification Program. The commission says that under AB 205 it becomes the lead agency for environmental review and permitting when a qualifying project elects to use that pathway, which gives developers an alternative to local permitting. ### What happens next? AES had said earlier this year that it planned to submit an application to the California Energy Commission through the Opt-In Certification Program. (aes.com) Once an application is filed, the state process would become the main venue for environmental review, public comment and any approval decision. The project’s public timeline points to 2028-2029 for construction and startup if it is permitted. (energy.ca.gov) Until then, the next concrete milestone is whether AES formally files with the commission and what state regulators, local agencies and residents put into the record once that case opens. (aes.com) (morganhilltimes.com)