Agenda item

Proposed Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) with an import/export capacity of up to 50MW and including associated infrastructure, engineering works, drainage, cabling, landscaping and access (Major Development/Affecting Public Rights of Way) (Amended Title)at Hallgate Farm, Hallgate Lane, Pilsley, Chesterfield, S45 8HN.

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The Committee considered an application that had been submitted for a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) with an import/export capacity of up to 50MW and including associated infrastructure, engineering works, drainage, cabling, landscaping and access (Major Development/Affecting Public Rights of Way) (Amended Title) at Hallgate Farm, Hallgate Lane, Pilsley, Chesterfield, S45 8HN.  The application had been referred to Committee by Local Ward Member, Councillor K Gillott, who had raised some concerns. An update report had been circulated which set out late representations regarding the application.

The recommendation by officers was to approve the application. The report to Committee explained the reasons for this.

The report highlighted that the proposal was supported in principle by both local and national planning policy. It was stressed that the public benefits of the proposal, in helping to manage energy supply and demand, supported the transition to net zero, and reduced reliance on fossil fuels should be attributed significant weight. Additionally, the scheme served to protect and enhance the District’s natural environment and increase both the quantity and quality of biodiversity and geodiversity.

Whilst it was accepted that the scheme would have a localised impact on public rights of way and visual amenity, it was suggested that these would be mitigated against and, therefore, there was no significant adverse impact. It was also accepted that the proposal represented limited harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset and provision of agricultural land. However, officers suggested that the benefits in terms of energy security and progress toward Net Zero outweighed the harm. The report also highlighted that the development would not have a significant adverse effect on the amenity or safety of local residents.

Officers concluded that the benefits of the proposal clearly outweigh the harm. They recommended, therefore, that the application be approved subject to conditions.

Before the Committee considered the application it heard from local Ward Member, Councillor Andrew Cooper, and supporters, Martin Blunden and Claire Davies. Committee also heard from Stuart Hammond who spoke on behalf of the applicant.

Committee considered the application. It took into account the relevant Local and National Planning Policies. This included Local Plan Policy SDC 10, concerning renewable and low carbon energy generation, and National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 8(c), concerning adapting to climate change.

Committee discussed the application. Some Members raised concerns regarding the recycling of batteries across the 40-year lifetime of the scheme. However, it was felt that for the proposal the benefits outweighed the harm. Some Members suggested that the benefits extended to positives for the rural economy. Some Members suggested that it would be good to see further community engagement and as much biodiversity net gain (BNG) as possible but overall supported the proposal.

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor F Petersen and Councillor W Jones moved and seconded a Motion to approve the application, in line with officer recommendation, subject to conditions. The Motion was put to a vote and approved.

RESOLVED – That planning permission be conditionally approved subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report with the final wording of the conditions delegated to the Planning Manager (Development Manager).