Solar farm and battery storage at Land At Aston Grange, Aston, Frodsham

The site and surroundings

The site covers about 55 hectares of agricultural land in open countryside and Green Belt, near woodland, railway infrastructure and watercourses.

“The application site extends to approximately 55 hectares of agricultural land and comprises two parcels separated by a north-south hedgerow. Two electricity pylons are located centrally within the site. The application site also includes a 670-metre section of Aston Lane, an adopted highway with a footway along its western side, together with an area of agricultural land to the east of Aston Lane at the northern extent of the site.”

“The northern part of the site contains an area of Ancient Woodland. The West Coast Main Line railway forms the eastern boundary of the site, whilst additional woodland is located along the southern boundary. The western boundary adjoins Hatton's Hey Wood, Whittle's Corner and Bank Rough Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which is also designated as Ancient Woodland.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier proposals included refused wind turbines, an environmental assessment screening decision and permission for associated works in Halton.

“23/02599/SCR: EIA screening opinion request to confirm the requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment in respect of the proposed development of solar and energy storage installation and associated infrastructure on the site: EIA Required 2023”

“25/00100/FULEIA: Proposed installation and operation of a ground mounted photovoltaic (PV) solar energy generation system (solar farm), energy storage facility and, associated infrastructure and engineering works in association with the laying of connection cable (associated infrastructure and engineering works at Aston Lane South only to be determined by Halton Borough Council): Approved by Halton Borough Council 18/08/25”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers considered renewable energy, climate, biodiversity and environmental benefits outweighed limited landscape harm and conflict with landscape sensitivity policy.

“Located on 55 hectares of undeveloped open countryside, the development is categorised as being large in size within the Cheshire West and Chester Landscape sensitivity study, situated in a wider landscape highly sensitive to change. The development therefore conflicts with Policy DM 52 of the Local Plan, which states that proposals in areas which have been assessed as having high sensitivity to the scale of development proposed will not be permitted.”

“Having regard to Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, officers conclude that the identified conflict with Policy DM52 is clearly outweighed by the significant renewable energy, climate change, biodiversity and wider environmental benefits arising from the proposal. No significant adverse impacts have been identified in respect of ecology, heritage, flood risk, residential amenity, highway safety or other environmental considerations.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Consultees generally raised no objections, subject to conditions covering construction, drainage, ecology, landscaping, highways, noise, archaeology and safety.

“Natural England – No objections subject to conditions relating to a Construction Environmental Management Plan which includes details to secure a 30m buffer between the footprint of construction and the adjoining SSSI as well as a Deconstruction Environmental Management Plan.”

“Parish Council - no objections, with it generally set out that this is a good proposal, subject to conditions related to the construction phase ensuring the impacts are managed, the road is repaired to a suitable standard following installation of the cable and landscaping to provide additional screening…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant spoke to the committee.

What members discussed

Members discussed agricultural land quality, alternative sites, grazing, biodiversity monitoring fees and flooding, including whether critical infrastructure would be at risk.

“Citing the current drought, with the proposed land was currently being used for agriculture, members enquired if good agricultural quality farmland was being lost and was this viewed as good quality farmland. Officers advised that 76 percent was considered grade 3b, 8 percent grade 3a, 15% is deemed grade 4, therefore this would not be considered the best and most versatile agricultural land.”

“Members requested a further explanation regarding the BNG regulatory and reporting fee of £37,962.42 secured via a 106 agreement, what would these monies be funding? Officers stated The Council would be studying the area and record the data to see if the requested levels of biodiversity were being met, the reported fee was to be used to pay for this monitoring . Members expressed concerns over the risk of flooding.”

Minutes

Main conditions

Permission was limited to 40 years and required decommissioning, environmental management, biodiversity monitoring, landscape works, drainage controls and a battery safety plan.

“Development must commence within 3 years 2. Temporary permission for 40 years 3. Decommissioning within 6 months following the expiration of permission 4. Development in accordance with the approved plans 5. Decommissioning and reinstatement scheme to be submitted 6.”

“No external lighting shall be installed until full details are submitted to and agreed in writing 18. Landscape environmental Management Plan (LEMP) to be submitted 19. Soft Landscaping implemented in accordance with agreed details within first available planting season following first use 20 Full details of a Sustainable drainage scheme for foul, surface and contaminated drainage shall be submitted and agreed 21 A preliminary risk assessment remediation and verification…”

Officer report