49.9MW battery storage system at Land 200 Metres North West Of Jamesfield Garden Centre, Newburgh

What was proposed

The application proposed a 49.9MW battery energy storage system, drainage, associated infrastructure and landscaping works.

“Proposal: Installation of 49.9MW battery energy storage system (BESS), formation of SUDS, associated infrastructure and landscaping works…”

“132/33kV Sub-station • Hardstanding (e.g., for manoeuvring and parking of trucks); • Access Tracks. • Up to 48 containerised Battery Storage Units. • Up to 12 inverter/transformer units. • Switch Room. • Subterranean fire water tanks. • Welfare Unit (with chemical toilet). • 2.4m Perimeter security fencing. • CCTV columns. • Profiled development platform and associated cuttings and embankments • SUDs pond. • Landscape works including tree and shrub planting.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is low-lying Grade 2 prime agricultural farmland beside an unnamed road, the Abernethy substation and existing electricity infrastructure.

“The site is located to the west of an unnamed road which serves the Jamesfield garden centre, farm shop and restaurant all located to the east. The Abernethy substation is located to the south and bound by Abernethy Road beyond.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and consultation

Earlier notices covered pre-application consultation and environmental screening, with the proposal judged not to require an environmental impact assessment.

“As noted above an EIA Screening has been undertaken and an Opinion issued by the Council. The proposal is a Schedule 2 Development in terms of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017. In the case of these regulations, planning permission cannot be granted to “EIA development” unless an environmental impact assessment has been undertaken.”

“Prior to the submission of the application for planning permission, a Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) was submitted to Perth and Kinross Council relating to the intended programme of pre-application consultation. The Council have, subsequently, agreed the proposed consultation approach.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposal was considered to comply with the Development Plan and no material considerations justified departing from it.

“Conclusion and Reasons for Recommendation…”

“To conclude, the application must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this respect, the proposal is considered to comply with NPF4, and the adopted Local Development Plan 2 (2019). Account has been taken account of the relevant material considerations, and none has been found that would justify overriding the Development Plan.”

Officer report

Consultees’ views

Consultees raised no objections, subject to conditions covering matters including noise, ecology, drainage, archaeology, access, traffic and landscaping.

“SSEN - No objection, subject to conditions relating to the access track ground levels, the storage of materials and an updated Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP)”

“Transport Scotland - No objection, subject to conditions relating to a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP), details of routes for any abnormal loads, accommodation measures and temporary traffic control measures…”

Officer report

Local concerns

One representation objected on grounds including construction traffic, fire safety, landscape and visual impact, noise, prime agricultural land and community benefits.

“One representation was received, the main issues raised are:”

“Adverse impact due to level of construction traffic. • Fire safety issues. • Landscape and visual impact. • Noise issues. • Loss of prime agricultural land. • No community benefits proposed.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The planning officer introduced the application, and the applicant addressed the committee and answered members’ questions.

The committee’s concerns

The proposed refusal focused on the loss of prime agricultural land, site suitability and the cumulative industrialisation of the area.

“Refuse, on the basis that the proposal is contrary to National Planning Framework 4 (2023), Policy 5 Soils and Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019), Policy 50 Prime Agricultural Land as the proposal is not on a suitable site as it involves the loss of prime agricultural land and will, by virtue of its cumulative impact with other consented developments, industrialise the area.”

“Amendment (Councillors I Massie and G Stewart)”

Minutes

The vote

Six members supported refusal and four supported approval subject to amended terms, conditions and informatives.

“Grant, subject to the amended terms, conditions and informatives contained in Report No. 26/204.”

“In terms of Standing Order 21.5 a roll call vote was taken.”

Minutes