The objections also raised concerns about fire safety, light pollution and highway safety, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service.

Some of these concerns were shared by ward councillor Mark Fairweather, who had called in the application for debate on the grounds the facility would harm the appearance of an area of "unspoilt and remote countryside".

He said: "This is purely about location. Normally, I would be supportive in principle of these types of application, but what it reveals here is policy conflicts that members here need to resolve."

However, councillor Paul Coleshill said: "If we are going to place in the countryside this large battery of batteries, this is a very good location, because this is in a dell. It is actually not particularly visible from most points."

Planning officers acknowledged the development would result in some "localised landscape harm", loss of high quality agricultural land and "less than substantial harm" to the setting of a nearby listed building.

But they added that these harms would be outweighed in a national push to bring such facilities online.

Officers also told councillors the facility was not expected to harm areas of ancient woodland or local ecology, or cause noise, light or air pollution issues.

They added that fire and highway safety would be secured by imposing conditions.

The facility is expected to have a storage capacity of up to 99 megawatts (MW) and comprise 108 individual modular battery units, arranged in 27 blocks of four, transformers and a power substation.