Agenda item

Application: 2021/0789/FULM

Location: Land South of Electricity Substation, Rawfield Lane, Fairburn

Proposal:Construction of a zero-carbon energy storage and management facility including containerised batteries, synchronous condensers and associated infrastructure, access and landscaping

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought before Planning Committee as the scheme was inappropriate development in the Green Belt and Very Special Circumstances were required to approve it.

Members noted that the application was for the construction of a zero-carbon energy storage and management facility including containerised batteries, synchronous condensers and associated infrastructure, access and landscaping.

An Officer Update Note had been circulated and published online ahead of the meeting which gave details of a letter from Zero Carbon which set out key details and benefits of the scheme. It also gave updated consultation responses from North Yorkshire County Council’s Ecologist and the Lead Local Flood Authority, as well as Hillam Parish Council and the applicant.

The Committee asked numerous questions of the Officer about the scheme in relation to more detailed dimensions of the transformers and buildings associated with the scheme, as well as the related infrastructure and which parish councils had been consulted.

Officers gave a detailed answers to the various queries about the scale and height of the numerous components of the proposal, and confirmed that all four relevant parish councils, namely Burton Salmon, Hillam, Monk Fryston and Fairburn, had been consulted.

James Blackburn, applicant, was invited to speak at the meeting and spoke in favour of the application.

Members debated the application further and acknowledged that the proposals and report before them were very complicated. The views of the Committee were that the scheme constituted inappropriate development in the green belt, that it resulted in harm to the openness of the green belt both spatially and visually, that it was not a production unit and did not generate green energy but was merely a storage facility taking and storing power from the grid and was not of national significance or strategic importance. Therefore, it was not justified in the green belt location.

The Committee agreed that there were other places in the Selby District where such a scheme would be better suited as it was not in keeping with the local area. The very special circumstances required for such development in the green belt had not been met and, as such, the application should be refused.

There was no proposer or seconder for the application to be granted.

The reasons for refusal were summarised by the Committee and were as follows:

·         the impact on the green belt would be substantial by way of inappropriate development, as the scheme represented a significant encroachment into open green belt on agricultural land;

·         the detrimental impact on the openness of the green belt which was highly protected by both local and national planning policy, which express the green belt’s importance to the government, in particular its openness and permanence;

·         the impact on the character of the green belt, which would again be significant due to the height of the structures and solid density of the multiple battery units;

·         the proposed battery storage units were not in keeping with the green belt and would be of detriment and do harm;

·         the whole areas would become industrialised and urbanised, and therefore out of character with the local conservation villages of Monk Fryston and Hillam;

·         highway safety would be compromised due to increased traffic on the A63 and at the crossroads of the junction of the A63 and Rawfield Lane;

·         the scheme did not constitute renewable energy provision and was inappropriate development which failed to preserve the openness of the green belt and was contrary to Policy SP3 of the Selby District Council Core Strategy and of the NPPF; and

·         lastly, very special circumstances did not exist to outweigh the harm to the green belt.

It was proposed and seconded that the application be REFUSED. A vote was taken and was CARRIED.

RESOLVED:

That the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

·               the impact on the green belt would be substantial by way of inappropriate development, as the scheme represented a significant encroachment into open green belt on agricultural land;

·               the detrimental impact on the openness of the green belt which was highly protected by both local and national planning policy, which express the green belt’s importance to the government, in particular its openness and permanence;

·               the impact on the character of the green belt, which would again be significant due to the height of the structures and solid density of the multiple battery units;

·               the proposed battery storage units were not in keeping with the green belt and would be of detriment and do harm;

·               the whole areas would become industrialised and urbanised, and therefore out of character with the local conservation villages of Monk Fryston and Hillam;

·               highway safety would be compromised due to increased traffic on the A63 and at the crossroads of the junction of the A63 and Rawfield Lane;

·               the scheme did not constitute renewable energy provision and was inappropriate development which failed to preserve the openness of the green belt and was contrary to Policy SP3 of the Selby District Council Core Strategy and of the NPPF; and

·               lastly, very special circumstances did not exist to outweigh the harm to the green belt.