24/01558/Flm
Perth and Kinross Council · 3 September 2025
Back to Planning and Placemaking Committee — 3 September 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Perth and Kinross Council Planning and Placemaking Committee – 3 September 2025 Report of Handling by Development Management and Building Standards Service Manager (Report No. 25/217) Proposal: Formation of a 30MW battery energy storage facility comprising battery storage units, ancillary buildings and equipment, access road and associated works Location: Land 600 Metres North East Of Cordon Farm, Abernethy Ref. No: 24/01558/FLM Ward No: P9- Almond and Earn Summary This report recommends refusal of the application as the development is not considered to comply with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan and there are material considerations apparent which outweigh the Development Plan. Background and Description of Proposal 1 It is proposed to develop a battery storage facility (BESS), with a total of 30 units, which will connect into the local distribution network at the Abernethy substation, located approximately 1.5km to the south-east of the site. The proposed development consists of the construction, operation, management and decommissioning of the BESS and associated infrastructure. A grid offer has been secured for the proposed development. If it became operational, the BESS facility would be highly flexible in its ability to meet the needs of the local distribution operator. It has been designed to provide frequency response services during periods of system instability or stress and would provide energy storage backup and supply capability during periods of system imbalance. 2 Energy storage is an important facilitator in the transition to, and integration of, energy to the grid from renewable sources. By reacting almost instantaneously during periods when renewable resources are not generating, or by storing power during periods of excess renewable output, it provides a quantifiable, stable, and reliable supply of power. This contribution plays a crucial role in the establishment of a resilient, cost-effective, and decarbonised energy system.
Page 2
3 The site has a wide, open, flat character distantly framed by hill ranges to the south and northeast, and forms a small part of a large broadly rectangular shaped field. It is currently under arable production, although does not categorise as prime agricultural land. Running through the centre of the field on a diagonal axis are overhead power (OHP) lines extending to Abernethy substation to the southeast and the wider Perth area to the north-west. The west and southeast boundaries of the field are lined with shrubs and trees, with all other boundaries open. The field’s northern boundary borders the southern banks of the River Earn, with the site boundary being some 550m to the south of the river. 4 The Nethy Burn is a watercourse that flows to the southeast of the site, part of which flows through a strip of woodland. To the west of Cordon Farm, the Ballo Burn flows on a north south axis under the railway line and into Abernethy. Carey Stank flows further west from its confluence with the River Earn towards Abernethy through arable farmland, and is culverted to the north of Broadwell Farm. 5 Fields in the vicinity of the site have few or no hedgerows. There are some small, scattered woodland blocks in a predominantly open landscape, which vary between a mix of deciduous and evergreen species. Site History 6 07/00487/FUL Full Planning Permission was approved on 5 April 2007 for the erection of a steel framed agricultural grain store and general storage building. 7 17/01234/FLL Full Planning Permission was approved on 19 October 2017 for the erection of an agricultural building for free range egg production and associated works. 8 24/00851/FLM Full Planning Permission Major was approved on 24 June 2024 for the formation of a 30MW battery storage facility comprising battery storage units, ancillary buildings, vehicular access, landscaping and associated works. 9 24/00006/PAN was received on 26 July 2024 for the formation of a 30MW Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), formation of vehicular accesses, tracks and associated infrastructure. 10 17/00487/FLL Full Planning Permission was approved on 30 June 2017 for the installation of photovoltaic solar panel farm and ancillary works. 11 19/01950/FLL Full Planning Permission was approved on 17 March 2020 for the installation of a photovoltaic solar panel farm and ancillary works (S42 to modify condition 8 (revised angle) of planning permission 17/00487/FLL). 12 20/00816/FLL Full Planning Permission was approved on 7 December 2020 for a S42 application to modify condition 4 (duration of permission) of permission 19/01950/FLL.
Page 3
13 22/00026/PAN On 16 December 2022 for the formation of a 30MW battery storage facility with associated access and infrastructure. 14 23/02060/FLL Full Planning Permission on 15 February 2024 for the renewal of planning permission 20/00816/FLL (S42 application to modify condition 4 (duration of permission) of permission 19/01950/FLL). 15 24/00851/FLM Full Planning Permission Major on 24 June 2024 for the formation of a 30MW battery storage facility comprising battery storage units, ancillary buildings, vehicular access, landscaping and associated works. 16 24/00006/PAN On 26 July 2024 for the formation the of a 30MW Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), formation of vehicular accesses, tracks and associated infrastructure. 17 17/00487/FLL Full Planning Permission was approved on 30 June 2017 for the installation of photovoltaic solar panel farm and ancillary works. 18 19/01950/FLL Full Planning Permission was approved on the 17 March 2020 for the installation of photovoltaic solar panel farm and ancillary works (S42 to modify condition 8 (revised angle) of planning permission 17/00487/FLL). 19 20/00816/FLL Full Planning Permission was approved on 7 December 2020 for a S42 application to modify condition 4 (duration of permission) of permission 19/01950/FLL. 20 22/00026/PAN on 16 December 2022 for the formation of a 30MW battery storage facility with associated access and infrastructure. 21 23/02060/FLL Full Planning Permission on 15 February 2024 for a renewal of planning permission 20/00816/FLL (S42 application to modify condition 4 (duration of permission) of permission 19/01950/FLL). 22 24/00851/FLM Full Planning Permission Major on 24 June 2024 for the formation of a30MW battery storage facility, comprising battery storage units, ancillary buildings, vehicular access, landscaping and associated works. 23 24/00006/PAN On 26 July 2024 for the formation of a 30MW Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), formation of vehicular accesses, tracks and associated infrastructure. Environmental Impact Assessment 24 An EIA screening has been undertaken. The proposal being a Schedule 2 development in terms of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017. In the case of these regulations, prohibition is given to the granting of planning permission to “EIA development” unless an environmental impact assessment has been undertaken. In this case the Council has taken the opinion that it is not EIA development, and that
Page 4
sufficient information has been submitted with the application to enable a determination in consideration of all relevant environmental matters. These environmental aspects requiring further consideration, are namely: noise, landscape and visual amenity, trees and biodiversity, roads and transportation and flood / drainage matters. Pre-Application Consultation 25 The proposed development is classed as a Major development in terms of the Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009; therefore, the applicant is required to undertake not any formal pre- application consultation with the local community. 26 A PoAN which set out the applicant’s approach to public consultation, was submitted to the Council on 05th July 2024. The PoAN form was submitted with a covering letter, aerial photo of the location, location plan and layout plan. 27 Two in-person consultation events took place at Williamson Hall, Kirk Wynd, Abernethy. The first event took place on 13th September 2024 between 3 and 7pm. This was attended by three members of the project team who were available to talk through the project with members of the public and interested parties. A total of 6 attendees took part in this event. The event was publicised through the letter drop and a public notice was placed in The Perthshire Advertiser on 23rd August 2024. The advert provided details of the proposal, site location, and gave notice of the event date. The Applicant’s contact details were provided, together with a deadline of 27th September 2024 by which to submit comments. 28 The second in person event took place on 25th September 2024 between 3 and 7pm. This was attended by three members of the project team who were available to talk through the project with members of the public and interested parties. A total of 5 attendees took part in this event. The event was publicised through the letter drop and a public notice was placed in The Perthshire Advertiser on 13th September 2024 and a reminder email was also sent on 19th September 2024 to Abernethy Community Council, PKC Ward Councillors, the SMP and MP about the second event. The advert provided details of the proposal, site location, and gave notice of the event date. The Applicant’s contact details were provided, together with a deadline of 27th September 2024 by which to submit comments. Development Plan 29 The Development Plan for the area comprises National Planning Framework 4 and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019) along with its associated statutory supplementary guidance.
Page 5
National Planning Framework 4 30 The National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) is the Scottish Government’s long- term spatial strategy with a comprehensive set of national planning policies. This strategy sets out how to improve people’s lives by making sustainable, liveable and productive spaces. NPF4 has an increased status over previous NPFs and comprises part of the statutory development plan. 31 The Council’s assessment of this application has considered the following policies of NPF4: • Policy 1: Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises • Policy 2: Climate Mitigation and Adaptation • Policy 3: Biodiversity • Policy 4: Natural Places • Policy 5: Soils • Policy 7; Historic Assets and Places • Policy 6: Forestry, Woodland and Trees • Policy 11: Energy • Policy 29: Rural Development Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019 32 The Local Development Plan 2 (2019) (LDP2) sets out a vision statement for the area and states that, “Our vision is of a Perth and Kinross which is dynamic, attractive and effective which protects its assets whilst welcoming population and economic growth.” It is the most recent statement of Council policy and is augmented by Supplementary Guidance. 33 The principal relevant policies are, in summary; • Policy 1A: Placemaking • Policy 1B: Placemaking • Policy 5: Infrastructure Contributions • Policy 6: Settlement Boundaries • Policy 8: Rural Business and Diversification • Policy 26A: Scheduled Monuments • Policy 26B: Archaeology • Policy 33A: Renewable and Low Carbon Energy: New Proposals for Renewable and Low-Carbon Energy • Policy 35: Electricity Transmission Infrastructure • Policy 39: Landscape • Policy 40A: Forestry, Woodland and Trees: Forest and Woodland Strategy • Policy 40B: Forestry, Woodland and Trees: Trees, Woodland and Development • Policy 41: Biodiversity • Policy 42: Green Infrastructure
Page 6
• Policy 50: Prime Agricultural Land • Policy 51: Soils • Policy 52: New Development and Flooding • Policy 53C: Water Environment and Drainage: Surface Water • Policy 56: Noise Pollution • Policy 60B: Transport Standards and Accessibility Requirements: New Development Proposals Statutory Supplementary Guidance 34 • Supplementary Guidance - Flood Risk and Flood Risk Assessments (adopted in 2021) • Supplementary Guidance - Landscape (adopted in 2020) PKC Non Statutory Guidance 35 • Planning Guidance - Planning & Biodiversity • Supplementary Guidance - Renewable & Low Carbon Energy (draft) National Guidance 36 The Scottish Government expresses its planning policies through Planning Advise Notes, Creating Places, Designing Streets, National Roads Development Guide and a series of Circulars in addition to NPF4. Planning Advice Notes 37 The following Scottish Government Planning Advice Notes (PANs) and Guidance Documents are of relevance to the proposal: • PAN 61 Planning and Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems • PAN 69 Planning and Building standards Advice on Flooding • PAN 75 Planning for Transport Creating Places 2013 38 Creating Places is the Scottish Government’s policy statement on architecture and place. It sets out the comprehensive value good design can deliver. It notes that successful places can unlock opportunities, build vibrant communities and contribute to a flourishing economy and set out actions that can achieve positive changes in our places. National Roads Development Guide 2014 39 This document supports Designing Streets and expands on its principles and is the technical advice that should be followed in designing and approving of all streets including parking provision.
Page 7
Consultations 40 As part of the planning application process the following bodies were consulted: External 41 Transport Scotland - No objection to the proposed development. 42 Historic Environment Scotland (HES) - Objection. Further information is required to determine the impact of the proposed development on Carey, Roman temporary camp and enclosure, Abernethy. There are significant concerns with the proposed creation of a temporary access road across the scheduled area of Carey Roman Temporary camp and enclosure. 43 National Gas Transmissions - An assessment has been carried out with respect to National Gas Transmission plc's apparatus and the proposed work location. Based on the location entered into the system for assessment the area has been found to be within the High Risk zone from National Gas Transmission plc's apparatus. This being the case, further assessment is required from the Asset Protection Team. Before commencing with any works on – site, all plans and a description of the proposal must be submitted for review. Furthermore, there is a National Gas Transmission operated, high pressure pipeline located 150m from the site boundary. This being the case, it is recommended that a condition is included regarding the requirement of an Earthing Report to be submitted. 44 Health and Safety Executive - No objection. However, if the proposed development is located within a safeguarding zone for a HSE licensed explosives site then contact should be made with HSE's Explosives Inspectorate. If the development is over a major accident hazard pipeline or in the easement around a major accident hazard pipeline, the pipeline operator should be consulted. If the development involves a new substation or the storage of electrical energy such as in a large battery storage unit and the development is proposed adjacent to a COMAH (Control of Major Accident Hazards) establishment, then the operator of the COMAH establishment should be consulted. If the development involves a substation or the storage of electrical energy such as in a large battery storage unit, and it is proposed in the vicinity of a nuclear site, the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) should be consulted. 45 Perth and Kinross Heritage Trust (PKHT)- No objection. However, the proposed development site lies within an area that is considered archaeologically sensitive. This being the case, it is recommended that a condition is included to ensure that a programme of archaeological works takes place to assess the presence / absence, character, and significance of archaeological deposits on the site. 46 Network Rail - Network Rail have no issues with the principle of the proposed development. However, Network Rail would object to the proposed BESS unless
Page 8
a condition relating to full compliance of the submitted Construction Traffic Management Plan and The Transport Statement, is included. Internal 47 Environmental Health (Noise Odour) - No objection, subject to conditions relating to the submitted Dust Management Plan, noise mitigation measures as per the Noise Impact Assessment, noise rating, noise limits and noise complaints, external lighting and construction working hours. 48 Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) - No objection. A search of the historic records did not raise any concerns regarding ground contamination and, therefore, there are no adverse comments to make on the application. 49 Development Contributions Officer - No objection and no comments to make on this proposal in terms of the Developer Contributions and Affordable Housing Supplementary Guidance. 50 Transportation and Development - No objection subject to conditions relating to a Construction Traffic Management Plan, the protection of the core paths, and to prohibit the use of construction traffic on the proposed operational route. 51 Structures and Flooding - No objection, subject to a recommended condition relating to SuDS. 52 Biodiversity/Tree Officer - No objection subject to conditions relating to the conclusions and recommendations of the submitted Biodiversity Study, an updated ecology survey (including a revised otter survey), a Construction Environment Management Plan, the submitted landscaping and parking scheme and details of biodiversity enhancements. 53 Development Plan Team - No objection, subject to the submission of fire safety information. Representations 54 Three representations were received. The main issues raised within the representations are: • The proposed development will result in an adverse impact on the existing roads network through construction traffic. • The proposed development will result in a fire risk. • The proposed development will result in a flood risk. • The proposed development will result in an adverse impact on the river Tay SAC. 55 These issues are addressed in the Appraisal section of the report.
Page 9
Additional Statements 56 Screening Opinion EIA not required Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Environmental Report Not required Appropriate Assessment under Habitats Regulations AA not required Design Statement or Design and Access Statement Submitted Report on Impact or Potential Impact eg Flood Risk Assessment Submitted Appraisal 57 Sections 25 and 37(2) of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) require the determination of the proposal to be made in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan comprises NPF4, the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019 and statutory supplementary guidance. The relevant policy considerations are outlined in the policy section above and are considered in more detail below. In terms of other material considerations, this involves considerations of the Council’s other approved policies and supplementary guidance. Principle 58 The location is a peripheral rural area 1.2km north of Abernethy, and approximately 300m to the east of Cordon Farmhouse. Policy considerations seeking to assess its suitability in principle are: LDP2 Policies :1A, 1B, Placemaking; Policy 8 Rural Diversification; Policy 33A: Renewables and Low Carbon Energy; Policy 50 Prime Agricultural Land; and Policy 51: Soils. The relevant NPF4 policies are Policy 1: Tackling the Climate and Nature Crises; Policy 2: Climate Mitigation and Adaptation; and Policy 11: Energy. 59 The proposal would provide essential energy balancing services to the National grid, actively contributing towards Scotland's CO2 reduction targets, supporting the principles of Scotland’s Energy Strategy (SES). Specifically, electricity would be drawn from the grid at times of low demand, stored and released back as required. When demand is higher, greater generation from non-renewable sources is required and energy storage facilities such as that proposed could reduce reliance on non-renewable resources, thus decreasing CO2 emissions. 60 NPF4 sets out six overarching spatial principles with “Just Transition” relating to the construction of renewable energy and their contribution to achieving net zero. The NPF4 Sustainable Places section emphasises the link to Scotland’s Climate Change Plan and sets the approach to achieving net zero emissions by 2045 and making significant progress by 2030. The NPF4 also links to Scotland’s Energy Strategy and highlights the importance of land and sea to be critical in delivering
Page 10
renewable energy developments. NPF4 provides detailed policy on Climate Change and Energy and details developer expectations to how proposed schemes will accord with the policies set out in the document. The overarching policy intent in NPF4 is to encourage, promote and facilitate all forms of renewable energy development onshore and offshore. 61 Policy 33A of LDP2 and Policies 1, 2 and 11 of NPF4 specifically encourages low carbon energy solutions where specific grid connection or the use of established infrastructure can occur. Therefore, on balance, and given the site-specific reasoning for the location of the battery storage unit, the proposed development could be supported in principle. Furthermore, consideration must be given to the finite lifespan of this facility. Whilst the overall operational life will be some 50 years, minimal disturbance to the site will be required, allowing the pre-existing land use to resume afterwards. However, it is important to note that the cumulative impacts of developments such as BESS and solar farms within the Abernethy area must be taken into full consideration when assessing this application. The importance of considering the cumulative effects of developments of this type on the appearance and character of the local landscape can be clearly seen when examining the below list of similar, recent applications, located in and around Abernethy: 62 24/01386/FLM - Formation of a 49.9MW battery energy storage facility comprising battery storage units, ancillary buildings and equipment, access road and associated works on land 200 metres North of Pitcurran House, Newburgh Road, Abernethy – approved. 63 22/00746/FLM - Formation of an up to 49.99MW energy storage compound comprising battery storage units, ancillary buildings, landscaping and associated works – approved. 64 25/00545/ECU36 - Installation of a 64.9MW battery energy storage system and associated infrastructure – ECU00005044 – No objection to ECU 65 22/00832/FLM - Formation of a 49MW battery energy storage facility comprising battery storage units, ancillary buildings, vehicular access, landscaping and associated works – approved. 66 25/00009/CONSUL - Installation of a 64.9MW battery energy storage system and associated infrastructure - ECU00005044 on land 60 metres North of Abernethy Cemetery, Newburgh Road, Abernethy – Pending. 67 22/02217/FLL - Formation of an energy storage facility comprising of 4 paired energy storage units and a control building – approved. 68 24/01870/ECU37 - Tealing to Westfield OHL 400 KV upgrade (reconductoring) - ECU00005168 on land 300 metres South of Mains of Megginch, Errol – No objection to ECU.
Page 11
69 19/01950/FLL - Installation of photovoltaic solar panel farm and ancillary works (S42 to modify condition 8 (revised angle) of planning permission 17/00487/FLL) - approved. 70 Note that the above list is not exhaustive. A full list of applications can be found at: Simple Search Design and Layout 71 LDP2 Policy 1A: Placemaking, requires new development to positively contribute to the quality of the surrounding built and natural environment. It further requires development to accord a series of place making criteria outlined in part B of the policy. On this basis, the physical nature of the proposal in terms of design, layout and physical characteristics must also be considered. 72 The design and layout essentially reflect the physical and engineering requirements for this type of development, taking into account environmental and technical standards. Perimeter fencing and CCTV contain the BESS compound to the west and the primary substation compound to the east. Within the BESS compound an access track is proposed around the perimeter of the site. This provides access to all parts of the site and is proposed to be constructed from permeable material. The proposed access track connects at two points to the existing track to the south of the site creating an informal one-way system. Two rows of BESS units will be arranged horizontally either side of a central row of PCS units. In addition, three storage units will be located along the southern edge of the site. Surface material within the site between the units will be permeable gravel aggregate or similar. 73 The proposed layout shows 30 BESS units, with each unit measuring 12.2m in length, 3m in height and 2.5m in width. The units are typically of metal construction and have a similar appearance to a shipping container. They will be positioned on three concrete plinths, with a minimum height of 100mm and maximum height of 500mm. Therefore, the maximum height of the BESS unit when installed will be 3.5m. 74 The PCS units are of metal construction and again are finished in dark green colour, with each unit measuring 12.2m in length, 2.5m in width and 3m high. The unit will sit above a series of concrete plinths measuring between 10-50cm high. The plinths will be positioned on a gravel subbase to aid free drainage. 75 Furthermore, the DNO and Switchgear buildings are clad in metal panels approximately 7.1m in length, 4.3m in width and 4m in height. The indicative switchgear drawings show a concrete base foundation approximately 7.3m in length x 4.5m wide and 100mm in height. However, the final design solution is likely to be smaller than the submitted typical unit presented within the application. In order to assess the impact of the development a worst-case scenario has been presented by the applicant.
Page 12
76 Notwithstanding the above, the proposed development will result in an industrial installation in a rural location, and therefore, it will be out of context with the surrounding landscape. Furthermore, the proposed BESS will not contribute positively to the quality of the surrounding environment and, in terms of placemaking, will further exacerbate the cumulative effects of this type of development in the wider Abernethy area. In light of this , and given the scale and location of the proposed development, it is considered that the introduction of such an industrialised feature into the landscape, with limited mitigation (at least in the first decade), will have a significant and immediate impact on the character and amenity of this location. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed development is contrary to LDP2 Policy 1A: Placemaking. Landscape and Visual Amenity 77 Perth and Kinross Council LDP2, Policy 39: Landscape states that development and land use change, including the creation of new hill tracks, should be compatible with the distinctive characteristics and features of Perth and Kinross’ landscapes. Accordingly, development proposals will be supported where they do not conflict with the aim of maintaining and enhancing the landscape qualities of Perth and Kinross, or the quality of landscape experience. 78 In this instance, a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) has been Submitted. The site is considered by the applicant to have a negligible impact on the local landscape character type, due to the flat nature of the landscape and the geometric fields. The sensitivity of “medium” assigned in the LVIA accords with the Tyldesley (2010) study referred to. The LVIA has suggested that, pre- mitigation, the industrial nature of the site would have a more than negligible impact on the agricultural landscape setting of the site. This effect increases when the other proposals in the surrounding area are taken into account, including solar and battery storage installations. Substantive planting could reduce this impact. 79 Furthermore, the LVIA states that given the low lying nature of the BESS, when located in a flat landscape, the visual impact would be negligible and that battery storage is of less impact than agricultural barns. However, the industrial nature of the installation is less in keeping with the rural landscape than an agricultural barn and, therefore, it would have a greater impact than has been suggested by the applicant. This would be the case until at least year 10, when planting is expected to be sufficiently mature. 80 The landscape and visual impacts of the proposed BESS alone are likely to be notable until screening is fully developed. NPF4 Policy 11(e)(ii) states that, where impacts are appropriately mitigated, development should generally be considered acceptable. However, account should be taken of the sufficiency of the planting, the time taken for it to mature, the effectiveness of the screening throughout the year and the cumulative effect on the landscape. Whilst the development may soften in time as planting becomes established there will be an immediate and sudden change in landscape character in this localised setting, impacting not just views outward from Abernethy, but also local walking and cycling routes.
Page 13
81 In terms of the impact on the setting of the Ochil Hills, the LVIA recognises the importance of the setting and that the BESS is a small part in the wider panoramic view. Nonetheless, the proposed development would have a moderate adverse impact at some locations, including Castle Law Hill in the short term. Cumulative impacts are addressed in the LVIA, and the impact on the Landscape Character Type extends the energy infrastructure in this area. Although the other BESS are closer to Abernethy and the substation, the proposed development in combination with the solar farm introduces an additional element into the landscape contributing to a patchwork of industrialisation in this locality. 82 The development is considered contrary to Policies 1A and 1B of the LDP2 2019 as well as the adopted Placemaking Supplementary Guidance. NPF4 Policy 11: Energy states that greater weight, in any planning balance under this policy, is placed on renewable energy benefits. However, in order for a development to be fully supported by this policy it is necessary for a development proposal to set out appropriate mitigation. In this case it is not considered appropriate mitigation is offered to offset significant landscape character impacts. Overall, the proposed development will have an adverse impact on the landscape character of the local area 83 Furthermore, all proposed planting and landscaping will take time to grow to, and be maintained at, an adequate height to help soften the visual impact of the development. This being the case, the proposed BESS will result in an adverse impact on the overall landscape experience. Therefore, the proposed development is contrary to LDP2 Policy 39 and NPF 4 Policy 11. Residential Amenity 84 LDP2 Policy 56: Noise Pollution states that there will be a presumption against the siting of development proposals which will generate high levels of noise in the locality of existing or proposed noise sensitive land uses and similarly against the locating of noise sensitive uses near to sources of noise generation. 85 The applicant has submitted a Noise Impact Assessment with this application. The assessment was conducted in line with the British Standard (BS) 4142:2014+A1:2019 ‘Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound’ methodology, which is the industry standard for assessment of commercial and industrial sound. As the battery storage facility is expected to be operational for 24 hours use the assessment has been undertaken for the daytime (0700 to2300) and nighttime periods (2300 to 0700). The main sources of noise at the site are 2x Substations, 15xPCS units and 30x Liquid Cooling BESS units. The NIA concluded that the results of the assessments demonstrate that the proposed development would not result in an adverse impact to amenity of the closest residential properties. 86 LDP2 Policy 55: Nuisance from Artificial Light and Light pollution is also a relevant policy in the assessment of this application.
Page 14
87 External lighting is likely to be required to allow for night-time safety and security, incorporating operational requirements. The exterior lighting scheme design would be likely to be in the form of low-level lighting, activated only when required. The aim would be to ensure adequate illumination for night visits if required, to deter trespassers and provide adequate security, whilst minimising light spillage into surrounding areas. 88 LDP2 Policy 57: Air Quality is also a relevant policy in the assessment of this application. 89 A dust impact risk assessment was undertaken using the method set out in the IAQM guidance. There are no residential receptors within 350 m of the site and only three residential properties have been identified along the route used by vehicles accessing the site during construction works. Therefore, the sensitivity of the area to dust soiling impacts is ‘low.’ 90 Appropriate dust management and mitigation measures for the site have been selected considering the dust sources on site; the location and proximity of sensitive receptors and their sensitivity to dusts; and the weather conditions. A Dust Management Plan (DMP) has been submitted with mitigations measures in line with the dust risk assessment outcomes. 91 Notwithstanding the above, any consent issued should include conditions in relation to the approved Dust Management Plan (DMP), the approved Noise Impact Assessment, the enclosure of all plant and machinery, external lighting and construction working hours. Therefore, subject to conditions, the proposed development is considered to be in accordance with LDP2 Policies 55, 56 and 57. Fire Safety 92 The provided fire safety checklist states that water source will be discussed with the fire service. It is necessary to identify requirements prior to granting permission as there are aspects which require land use change: • A water source with appropriate capacity is required prior to granting permission as this may necessitate water storage tanks on site. • The site must be accessible by fire vehicles or that provision has been made for fire vehicles to turn or pass. Fire Service guidance requires there be 2 access points. • Provision must be made for storage of water runoff from fire-fighting. This may require underground storage or bunding, particularly given the connectivity to the Tay SAC (not addressed in the EcIA). • Surfaces on site should be impermeable to protect soils in case of fire. 93 However, in this instance, the information listed above has not been submitted by the application. Given that the application is being recommended for refusal on
Page 15
other grounds, this information has not been sought. It is important to note that this information could be conditioned if an approval was being recommended. Soils and Prime Agricultural Land 94 In this instance, the relevant policies are LDP2 Policy 51: Soils, and NPF4 Policy 5: Soils. 95 LDP2 Policy 51: Soils states that the Council seeks to protect soils from damage such as erosion or compaction. Developments located on areas of good quality agricultural soils will only be supported where they: (a) minimise impact on soil resources; (b) implement appropriate soil management measures, particularly for valuable soils such as good-quality agricultural soils*, and soils with a high organic content; (c) adopt best practice when moving, storing and reinstating soils (d) consider opportunities to re-use soils necessarily excavated from the site. 96 A report has been provided showing that the land under the development is class 3.2 which is not prime agricultural land. It does, however, constitute good quality soil as per LDP2 Policy 51. In this instance, Policy 51 has not been fully addressed in the Design and Access Statement. Furthermore, the location of the development site necessitates the use of significant planted screening which, while necessary for landscape reasons, will result in an increase in the loss of productive soil use. In light of this, any consent issued would require a condition that a Soil Management Plan is submitted for approval, prior to development commencing on – site. Therefore, subject to condition if the proposal was recommended for approval, the proposed BESS is in accordance with LDP2 Policy 51 and NPF4 Policy 5. Roads and Access 97 LDP2 Policy 15: Public Access states that development proposals that would have an adverse impact upon the integrity of any (including proposed) core path, disused railway line, asserted right of way or other well-used route and connectivity proposals identified in the Regional Transport Strategy and Delivery Plan will not be permitted. 98 The construction route is part of the core path network, ABNY/103 - A913 at Broadwell, Glenfoot, to Carey, ABNY/122 - A913 via Hatton Road to Hatton, and ABNY/109 – Abernethy at A912 & Station Road to Carey via Hatton. The operational route to the site also utilises the core path network ABNY/122 - A913 via Hatton Road to Hatton. This being the case, any consent issued would require a condition that all sections of the adjacent core path network shall be protected during, and after, construction.
Page 16
99 LDP2 Policy 60A: Existing Infrastructure, sees existing transport infrastructure identified, and encouragement given to the retention and improvement of these facilities provided the improvements are compatible with adjoining land uses. 100 The applicant proposes to utilise the M90, A912 and A913 to access the site for the purposes of construction, using the private access track at Broadwell Farm to gain access to the site. The project is estimated to take up to 6 months to construct, with deliveries fluctuating throughout the construction period. It is estimated that there will be an average of six HGV visiting the site per day. During the period of construction, it is estimated that there will be up to 10 staff on site per day. 101 The applicant has advised that to reduce the impact of the development that they will introduce a booking system with fixed arrival times to ensure HGV traffic can arrive and depart without encountering other construction traffic along the private access. 102 Furthermore, a Construction Traffic Management Plan will be required for the development if it was approved, which would require focus on the mitigation to be provided to the public road network during the construction phases, in order to prevent damage to the local road and core path networks. Any consent issued would require a suitably worded condition to this effect. A further condition should be included to ensure that the operational route will not be used for construction traffic nor for the decommissioning phase of the project. In light of the above, and subject to conditions, the proposed development is in accordance with LDP2 Policies 15 and 60A. Drainage and Flooding 103 LDP2 Policy 52: New Development and Flooding, states that the Council supports the actions and objectives to avoid increased, reduce overall, and more generally manage flood risk in alignment with SEPA Strategies and Plans. NPF4 Policy 22 states that development proposals must have regard to the water environment, and drainage, including floodwater management, within any proposal. 104 The development area is located outside of fluvial and coastal flood extents, including the extent for future flood scenarios. Medium to High surface water flooding areas are located within the proposed development site. A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted as part of this application. The FRA indicates that the development is unlikely to increase flood risk in other areas, and managing surface water on the site would result in a positive reduction of flood risk. 105 Also relevant to the flood risk of the site is LDP2 Policy 53C: Surface Water Drainage, requires Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) measures including relevant temporary measures at the construction phase.
Page 17
106 In this instance, there has not been any information submitted regarding surface water drainage provision. This being the case, any consent issued would require a condition that full design details of a sustainable urban drainage system (SuDS) are submitted for approval, prior to development commencing on-site. Therefore, subject to condition, the proposed development is in accordance with LDP2 Policies 52 and 52C River Tay Special Area of Conservation Catchment 107 The River Tay is not expected to be directly affected based on the supplied drawings and reports. However, it is advisable to adhere to the SEPA Pollution Prevention Guidelines (PPG). Consideration should also be given to the impact on the River Tay Special Area of Conservation. This being the case, a condition could be included to ensure that a Construction Method Statement is submitted prior to development commencing on site. Furthermore, any revisions to the FRA must be reflected in an updated Drainage Strategy, which could also be covered by a condition. In terms of drainage, and subject to conditions, the proposed development is in accordance with LDP2 Policies 47 and 53C. Conservation Considerations 108 Polices 26A and 26B of the LDP2 and Policy 7 of NPF4 are applicable to the application. The proposed development site lies within an area that is considered archaeologically sensitive. The development lies adjacent to the post glacial shoreline and recent archaeological research located a significant Mesolithic camp site, the first monument site of its type found in Perth and Kinross. 109 The proposed access appears to be using existing tracks, some of which appears to go through the scheduled monument at Carey Roman Temporary Camp with no indication of any required upgrades to existing accessways. As a result of consultation with Historic Environment Scotland, further details on the options appraisal/route selection process and details of any alternative routes that would avoid the scheduled area must be provided. Furthermore, an assessment of the likely impacts on the monument must be submitted. This should include consideration of construction risks, potential for compaction with regard to the weight and frequency of vehicle movements fully informed by an assessment of the likely depth and nature of surviving archaeological deposits along the route of the track. 110 However, a revised access report, taking into consideration any potential impacts on the scheduled monument, has not been provided. Therefore, it has not been possible to fully assess the potential archaeological impacts of the proposed development. This being the case, the proposed BESS is considered to be contrary to LDP2 Policies 26A, 26B and NPF4 Policy 7. Natural Heritage and Biodiversity 111 LDP2 Policy 40: Forestry, Woodland, and Trees states that Tree Surveys, undertaken by a suitably qualified professional, should accompany all
Page 18
applications for planning permission where their sites contain trees and that there is a presumption in favour of protecting woodland resources. This policy is relevant in relation to the hedging on the site. 112 LDP2 Policy 41: Biodiversity states that the Council will seek to protect and enhance all wildlife and wildlife habitats, whether formally designated/protected or not, all whilst taking into account the ecosystems and natural processes in the area. 113 The submitted Preliminary Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) was undertaken at the correct time of year but the otter survey is not in accordance with best practice as the survey was undertaken following heavy rain. Best practice warns against this as washes away field signs. This reduces confidence in the otter survey results and the survey should have been repeated once the weather conditions were more suitable. This being the case, any consent issued would require a condition that a further otter is survey is carried out. 114 Based on the conclusion of the submitted Winter Bird Survey Report, measures that would improve habitat and food sources for yellowhammer, reed bunting, grey partridge, fieldfare, tree sparrow and linnet, should be considered. Many of these species are of UK conservation concern and are listed as priority species in the Tayside Local Biodiversity Action Plan. As outlined in the PKC Planning for Nature, all Major Developments are required to submit a Site Biodiversity Action Plan. In light of this, any consent issued would require a condition to this effect. 115 The proposed development is located within 2km of five statutory designated sites for nature conservation including SAC and SPA. From the information submitted, it appears this proposal could have likely significant effects on these sites. Therefore, the Planning Authority must undertake an Appropriate Assessment in line with the Habitats Regulations Appraisal. Information to inform this Assessment such as detailed methods and proposed mitigation measures should be provided by the applicant. 116 Limited information regarding achieving the significant biodiversity enhancement required by NPF4 has been provided. However, woodland creation, joining up of habitats, grassland management, bird and bat boxes are proposed. Some mitigation measures have been provided in the submitted ecological information. However, a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP), outlining the measures to protect the watercourse from the impact of pollution and sediment to ensure no adverse effects on designated sites, should be submitted and approved in writing by the Council as Planning Authority. This being the case, any consent issued would require conditions to cover the submission of a CEMP, and the details of all proposed mitigation measures. A further condition regarding the proposed biodiversity enhancements will also be included in any consent that is issued.
Page 19
Economic Impact 117 The economic impact of the proposal is likely to be minimal and limited to the construction phase of the development. However, the proposal will support local renewable energy generation by helping balance fluctuations of intermittent energy generation. It will assist in the creation of a national grid asset of regional significance for the Perth and Kinross area. 118 No information has been provided on how the local community will benefit from this application to satisfy the requirement in NPF4 Policy 11(c) (excluding consideration of direct community benefit payments). Consideration should be given to consideration of local priorities, maximising use of local supply chains and opportunities for local training. Consideration should be given to how the development can support NPF4 Policy 25. Variation of Application Under Section 32A 119 This application was not varied prior to determination, in accordance with the terms of section 32A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, as amended. Planning Obligations and Legal Agreements 120 None required. Direction by Scottish Ministers 121 Under the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, regulations 30 – 33 there have been no directions by the Scottish Government in respect of an Environmental Impact Assessment screening opinion, call in or notification relating to this application. Conclusion and Reasons for Recommendation 122 To conclude, the application must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this respect, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the Development Plan. Account has been taken account of the relevant material considerations and none has been found that would justify overriding the Development Plan. Accordingly, the proposal is recommended for refusal on the grounds identified below. Recommendation Refuse the application: 1. The development, owing to its size, appearance and location, combined with the cumulative impact from the surrounding developments, raises significant landscape character and visual impact concerns, failing to contribute positively to
Page 20
the quality of the surrounding built and natural environment. The development is therefore considered contrary to Policies 1A and 1B ‘Placemaking’, as well as Policy 39 ‘Landscape’, of the adopted Perth & Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019), and Policy 4 ‘Natural Places’ of National Planning Framework 4 (2023). 2. The development, owing to inadequate mitigation in seeking to offset landscape concerns raised, fails to comply with Policy 11 ‘Energy’ of National Planning Framework 4 (2023). 3. The proposed development does not comply with Policy 7 ‘Historic Assets and Places’ of National Planning Framework 4 (2023), or Policies 26A, 26B ‘Scheduled Monuments and Archaeology’ of the adopted Perth & Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019), as it fails to fully consider the impacts to the nationally designated asset of Carey, Roman temporary camp and enclosure, Abernethy (SM9449). It does not provide adequate evidence or justification for the chosen access route or consider alternate routes which would avoid unnecessary damage to the nationally protected site. Procedural Notes Not applicable to this application. Background Papers Letters of representation 3 Authors Name Designation Contact Details Alan Atkins Planning Officer (Majors) developmentmanagement@pkc.gov.uk Approved Name Designation Date Sean Panton Team Leader (Major Applications and Enforcement) 20 August 2025