PLANS for a battery storage and energy storage site at Helensburgh’s Ardencaple Farm have been recommended for refusal by council officials.

Councillors will rule on the application by YLEM Energy, which has received 63 objections along with a 36-signature petition against, at a meeting next week.

There has also been one expression of support and three neutral representations received by Argyll and Bute Council during the planning process.

An authority planning officer has said that planning permission should be denied because of “unacceptable adverse impact” on Helensburgh’s greenbelt.

The application will be decided by the council’s planning, protective services and licensing committee at its meeting on Wednesday, October 23.

They also cited “substandard access roads”, and “noise generation and potential amenity impacts” as reasons why the application should be refused.

A handling report said: “The application submission has in the opinion of officers failed to demonstrate that a greenbelt location is essential for the location of the development due to the exclusion of all greenfield land within the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park area at an early stage in the site search exercise.

“This has resulted in the identification of a site, within a sensitive greenbelt location some 2.7km from the required substation connection point on the edge of the settlement of Helensburgh.

“Officers therefore consider insufficient justification to prove the need to locate the development within the Helensburgh greenbelt has been provided by the applicant.

“In addition, the field within which the development is proposed to be located, forms an integral and important part of the greenbelt at this point, framing the settlement of Helensburgh and providing an open context for attractive and important views of the town and beyond to the Clyde Estuary.

“Officers consider the quality of this view to be extremely high and therefore its sensitivity to adverse impact is also high.

“The proposed development would unacceptably undermine the function and openness of the greenbelt at this point by introducing industrial scale development.”

The officer added: “However, given that the proposal is for essential energy infrastructure which contributes to addressing the climate emergency and the objectives of NPF4 Policy 1, it must be acknowledged in the decision-making process that there is strong policy support for such proposals.

“As this recommendation to refuse the current application is a matter of officers balancing competing policy objectives, it is essential that the strong policy support for such proposals is also considered... in coming to a planning decision in this case.

“This is not in officers’ opinion a clear-cut matter, and the significance of the contended and potential adverse impact, non-compliance with roads Standards and inadequate noise information submission, must be considered in the balance against this strong energy policy support for such proposals.”