Evanton battery storage development approved despite councillor protests
Councillors have approved plans for a battery storage site near Evanton despite the potential risk of fire services getting stuck trying to access the site.
It is one of many battery storage schemes that have come across councillors’ desks as the renewable net zero transition continues.
Questions were asked over the suitability of the site in terms of sheltering, agriculture and fire safety.
However, after an hour of debate councillors finally approved the application.
The application was originally submitted back in June of last year, but was referred to the north planning applications committee because of its “major development” designation.
Councillors approve Loch Luichart battery energy storage system (BESS) application
Garve proposed battery storage system prompts concerns
Community councils demand an end to ‘salami slicing’ for major energy projects
Several members of the committee were unhappy with what planners called an “agricultural access” for the fire service to attend an emergency.
The application listed an agricultural gate as a point of access for fire vehicles, who would have to traverse a field to respond to an emergency.
Several councillors referenced the idea of fire service trucks getting stuck in a muddy field in attempting to get to the scene.
Councillor Matthew Reiss said: “It looks a pretty muddy field, and fire tenders have an awful lot of water in them.
“I don’t know whether that’s actually practical.
“Personally, if I was a fire fighter, which I’m not, I wouldn’t be particularly happy with assuming you’re just going to be able to get in across the field.”
Cllr Andrew Jarvie said: “I don’t have an issue with this site, I have an issue with that access.”
He asked for the application to reflect current fire safety guidance, and for a more permanent access for emergency services to be installed.
Councillors were also told of a 10-year plan to screen the site from the road with trees post-construction.
Cllr Maxine Smith asked to ensure there would be “fast growing” trees planted to raise the screen as fast as possible.
Councillors were assured the tree planting would be under regular maintenance.
The quality of the agricultural land was also of concern.
A scale measuring the acceptability of agricultural land had marked it just above the “prime land” limit.
This was brought to the attention of councillors who asked why potentially farmable land was being used for this project over other locations.
However, councillors were told the other available sites were not of concern to this battery site.
In its objection, Kiltearn Community Council cited more appropriate “brown field” sites nearby.
According to the planning officer, Claire Farmer-McEwan, the applicant did not disclose any alternatives sites to protect the privacy of land owners.
In her closing remarks, Cllr Smith said: “I don’t think I could have formed a motion that would be weighted enough to refuse this application, which I would actually like to do.
“There’s no point. I know when I’m beat.”
She added she thought the application was “in the wrong place”.
Cllr Richard Gale proposed an alternative motion to refuse the application, but it was voted down in the chamber.
