Agenda item

Development of a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) of up to 400MW, connected directly to the National Grid, with associated infrastructure including access, drainage and landscaping.

The Lead Project Officer presented the application for the development of a battery energy storage system (BESS). The proposed site would be located within Chickerell and members were informed of the various designations of the application site and surrounding areas. It was also noted that there was a current application for approximately 400 homes to the west of the site and the proposed location of that application was shown on a map to provide an indication of proximity between the two sites.

 

The topography of the site was explained to members and a number of photographs were provided from various viewpoints around the site and access points to and from the site. A proposed site plan was provided and the layout and composition of the site was explained by the case officer, who also noted that the timespan of the application was limited to 40 years.

 

The size and appearance of the BESS containers, control room building, water tanks, inverter building and steel and mesh fencing were all shown to members and cross sections of different points in the site were also provided, to give a sense of the proposed change in ground levels throughout the site.

 

The Lead Project Officer outlined the sustainability benefits of the scheme and explained that the BESS would allow for the storage of electricity generated from renewable sources and the ability to supply electricity to the National Grid when required. Extracts from the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero (DESNZ) Renewable Energy Planning Database showing current BESS facilities in the UK, as well as those under or awaiting construction were provided, to give members an indication of how prevalent BESS facilities were in the UK and the scale of projects. Planning applications for BESS’ within Dorset and neighbouring local planning authorities were also listed.

 

It was explained that although there was a loss of best and most versatile agricultural land, it was considered that the highly sustainable location of the development outweighed the loss, as it was necessary for the compound to be located near to a substation.

 

Extracts from the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment undertaken by the applicant were shown to members, to give the extent of visibility and visual impact. Extracts showing proposed landscape mitigation at Year 1 and Year 10 were displayed to show the effect that planting would have on screening the site over time. A noise impact assessment showed that there would not be a significant impact on the noise levels in the surrounding area and it was also noted that there were no highway concerns with the application.

 

The Lead Project Officer explained that there was a potential fire risk, due to the storage of lithium batteries on the site, however national planning practice guidance on safeguarding against fire risk had been followed, as well as guidance from the National Fire Chiefs Council and the local Fire & Rescue Service had been consulted as part of the consultation process. Fire risk and compliance with guidance had also been considered by a third-party consultant instructed by Dorset Council. As a result, it had been ensured that the BESS containers were an appropriate distance away from each other, other on site infrastructure, vegetation and surrounding land uses (including proposed residential development). Access had been changed to allow emergency services more flexibility in tackling a fire and passing places had been added. Water tanks had been resituated to be further away from the BESS containers.

 

The safety features of the BESS containers were summarised for members and included both preventative measures such as, smoke and heat detectors and mitigating features such as, water tanks and a gas suppression system. The risk of fire spreading between containers was considered low due to the distances between them.

 

The key planning issues were summarised and it was considered that the application was acceptable as the moderate visual harm was outweighed by the significant renewable energy benefits, biodiversity net gains and construction jobs.

 

Public representations were received in opposition to the application from Mr Hardy, Dr Farron, Ms Hazel, and Mr Perrott, who raised concerns over the potential fire risk of the site and the proximity of the site to nearby homes. They also raised concern over the destruction of wildlife during the construction of the site and questioned the renewable energy benefits, as the BESS compound would not produce any additional energy. Cllr Gill Taylor also spoke as Ward Member and represented Cllr Simon Clifford. She raised concerns about safety and explained that the development was unpopular among local residents.

 

The meeting adjourned at 11:32 – 11:44

 

Mr Etheridge and Mr Troup spoke as representatives of the applicant in support of the application. They expressed that the BESS compound would comply with safety regulations and that the risk from a fire spreading between containers was very low.

 

Following the public speakers the Lead Project Officer clarified that there had been one incident of a fire at a BESS facility in the UK and that site was not operated by the applicant; there had been 16 letters of support for the application in addition to the letters of objection and that the NPPF stated that the applicant did not need to demonstrate the need for the development.

 

The Lead Project Officer provided the following responses to questions from members about the application:

·       The application would follow national guidance on the storage of water that would provide for a minimum of two hours of use in the event of a fire.

·       The general guidance on lithium BESS fires is to use a defensive approach with water used to cool the other units down and prevent the fire from spreading.

·       The Environment Agency had been consulted about runoff and the applicant had designed the scheme to include attenuation ponds.

·       The Energy Act amends the Electricity Act to acknowledge that batteries are a distinct form of energy generation. The proposals would contribute to decarbonisation of the National Grid, by allowing the storage of energy from renewable sources and reducing curtailment of renewable energy generation.

·       The time limit of 40 years was standard for a BESS facility. It is not known what the demand will be for such a site in the future, given technological developments.

·       The Emergency Planning Team at Dorset Council had been consulted on the application and would assist in coordinating an emergency response in the event of a fire.

·       It was considered that the proposed access was sufficient to allow emergency vehicles to access the site.

·       The access to the site had been amended to include a circular route around the site.

·       Public benefits of the site included access to 6 hectares of publicly available space for informal recreational purposes.

·       The proposed permissive footpaths  would not impact the outcome of a Definitive Map Modification Order DMMO planning application in relation to the proposed designation of public footpath north/south through the site.

 

The committee voted in favour of extending the meeting beyond three hours.

 

Meeting adjourned at 13:01 – 13:34

 

Cllr David Taylor left the meeting at 13:01

 

Having had the opportunity to ask questions of officers and discuss the merits of the application, although some members expressed concerns over the safety aspects of the application, several members felt that the objections raised did not warrant refusal of the application.

 

Proposed by Cllr Bolwell and seconded by Cllr Ridout.

 

Decision:

A)   That authority be delegated to the Head of Planning or the Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement to grant planning permission, subject to the completion of a legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in a form to be agreed by the Head of Legal Services to secure:

• Permissive footpath routes through the site as shown on Landscape Plan ref. 21-LP-01 Rev B and publicly accessible recreational space within Fields 5 and 6 for the lifetime of the development.

 

And subject to the planning conditions set out in the appendix to these minutes.

           and

 

B)   Refuse permission for the reasons set out below if the agreement is not completed by 29 January 2025 (6 months from the date of committee) or such extended time as agreed by the Head of Planning:

·       In the absence of a completed Section 106 legal agreement to secure provision of permissive footpath routes   through the site as shown on Landscape Plan ref. 21-LP-01 Rev B and publicly accessible recreational space within Fields 5 and 6 for the lifetime of the development the degradation to existing Public Right of Way S16/21 would not be compensated for and there would be a resultant net degradation of the Public Right of Way network in conflict with  West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland Local Plan (2015) Policy COM7.