Battery energy storage system at Land North Of Hill Farm Wacton Road, Forncett St Peter
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by South Norfolk Broadland South Norfolk Development Management (Planning) Committee on 18 Feb 2026.
What was proposed
The application sought permission for a 120MW/240MW battery energy storage system with infrastructure and landscaping.
“Applicant’s Name: [name withheld] Land north of Hill Farm, Wacton Road, Forncett St. Peter Proposal The installation of a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) including associated infrastructure and landscaping…”
“The application seeks full planning permission for the installation of a 120MW/240Mw Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) including associated infrastructure and landscaping.”
Officer report
The site and its setting
The site is arable countryside near Hill Farm, with pylons, nearby homes, public footpaths and a proposed 35-year temporary use.
“The site forms arable agricultural land. Although the site is recognised to be set within the open countryside although a line of traditional electricity pylons line along the site to its immediate east, which form a notable feature in the landscape, which is otherwise made up of pockets of woodland, mature trees and hedgerows. Residential property is set on the west side of the site in particular lining Wacton Road.”
“The development is proposed to be set over a 35-year temporary period, upon which the site would be decommissioned and returned to arable use.”
Officer report
Earlier planning history
Earlier permissions included a 1994 agricultural land change of use and a 2024 screening opinion that found environmental impact assessment was not required.
“1994/1417 Change of use of agricultural land to vehicle driving and instruction, add Laser shooting to activities permitted (91/1273) and erect 4 spectator shelters and tyre walls Approved - 12.12.1994”
“2024/1495 Request for Screening Opinion under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 in relation to battery energy storage EIA not required - 30.09.2024”
Officer report
Why officers supported it
Officers considered the proposal suitable low-carbon infrastructure whose benefits outweighed localised landscape, traffic and other impacts, subject to conditions.
“The proposal is considered to form a suitable and appropriate piece of electrical storage infrastructure which will increasingly assist with and host / distribute the transition of clean renewable energy, a key priority under central and local planning policy.”
“In this case SNLP Policy DM 4.1 is considered relevant and supports proposals for renewable energy generating development subject to key considerations relating to landscape character / appearance, the effect on heritage assets and the amenities and living conditions of (nearby) residents. The application, although not specifically solar or wind power in its own right, is intended to support UK renewable energy systems.”
Officer report
What residents said
Residents raised concerns about fire, safety, traffic, noise, pollution, countryside impacts, biodiversity, heritage and the need for the facility.
“Concern with (residential and livestock) evacuation in event of fire • Battery storage inefficient • Safety risks • Environmental destruction required to source batteries (not a solution in line with net zero) • Fire risks / chemical hazards • Long Stratton Fire Station not being upgraded despite growth of development in town • Impact upon countryside / character of area • Local fire service only retained staff (not full time / specialist) / Fire Service ill equipped to…”
“Disruption and damage to local roads • Proximity and relationship to residential property (risk to human health) • BESS surplus to requirements • Light pollution • Impact upon wildlife / biodiversity • Impact upon mental health • Devalue properties • Water pollution from any water used for fire purposes • Company lacks experience • Ground not level • Contamination of agricultural land • Loss of agricultural land • Heritage impact (archaeology and nearby conservation area)…”
Officer report
The committee vote
Members voted five to two to approve the application subject to conditions.
“Decision : Members voted 5 - 2 for approve subject to conditions:”
Minutes
The decision
Permission was approved subject to conditions covering the temporary period, plans, fire safety, access, construction, ecology, landscaping, noise and drainage.
“Temporary Time Limit (35 years plus grid connection and decommissioning time) 2. Approved Plans 3. Fire Safety Management Plan 4. Decommissioning Plan 5. External Materials 6. Surface materials 7. Security and Crime Prevention 8. Access arrangements 9. Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) 10.HGV Routing Management Plan 11.Protection plan to users of PRoW Forncett FP14 12.Unexpected contamination 13.”
Minutes
Sources
- South Norfolk Broadland South Norfolk Development Management (Planning) Committee minutes, 18 February 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of South Norfolk Broadland's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Council
- South Norfolk Broadland
- Date
- Wednesday 18 February 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- South Norfolk Broadland committee decisions →
This committee's year
14 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.