Conditional permission recommended for wind turbine proposal

Officers recommend approval, but over 300 residents object to proposed wind turbine

betty-haunt-turbine

The coming Monday sees the Planning Committee gather to determine the application for a wind turbine at Betty Haunt Lane, Newport (see planning application).

Conditional permission has been recommended by officers for the proposed wind turbine. The application has attracted over 350 letters from third parties. The report states that of this total, 322 state an objection to the application whilst six are in support of the proposal.

Public meeting
Residents are invited to attend the meeting which starts at 6pm at County Hall (Monday 7th January 2013), where 15 minutes will be allocated at the beginning of the meeting for public questions.

The summary presented to members of the committee states:

It is recommended that for all matters, apart from noise, Members accept the case for
granting conditional planning permission for this planning application, subject to the
applicant entering into a legal agreement to secure the decommissioning of the turbine
and the restoration of the site, to include a bond. The applicant is requested to
undertake a further noise assessment, which would then be reported back to Members
for consideration at a future meeting of the Planning Sub-Committee. If Members are
minded to refuse the planning application on other material planning grounds then
adverse noise impact is included as a reason for refusal.

The full report is embedded below for your convenience


Wightfibre sponsors the Isle of Wight News by OnTheWight

Thursday, 3rd January, 2013 1:40pm

By

ShortURL: http://wig.ht/2anE

Filed under: Green Issues, Isle of Wight News, Newport, Planning, Top story

Print Friendly

.



18 Comments

  1. James Luke's comment is rated +7 Vote +1 Vote -1

    3.Jan.2013 3:30pm

    The 300 objections to this proposal should be taken seriously.

    I have learned the hard way how upsetting this type of planning dispute can be. I personally took little interest in the wind turbine debate as it didn’t impact me. However, when I realised that I would be impacted by the asphalt plant I took more of an interest and have been totally shocked by the whole process. I now have total sympathy with, and support for, those objecting to the wind turbines.

    Others reading this may have little interest in either the wind turbine or asphalt plant objection.

    However, with Shale Gas Fracking on the horizon I suspect a whole new group of Islanders will suddenly be thrust into this nightmare.

    The Localism Act was meant to give local communities a greater say in planning issues.

    The hundreds / thousands of people objecting to these planning applications should be listened to.

    It is time for all Islanders to think hard about our planning policy and make your thoughts known to your Councillor. With elections in May we may have a near term opportunity to vote for Councillors who care about their electorate.

    Reply
  2. martin william wareham's comment is rated -1 Vote +1 Vote -1

    3.Jan.2013 7:59pm

    My only objection to this application is the height of the Turbine.This one is far to small it should be at least one hundred metres thus any ground noise created would be less.

    Reply
  3. Stewart Blackmore's comment not rated yet. Add your vote Vote +1 Vote -1

    3.Jan.2013 8:24pm

    At both the Cheverton and Wellow planning committees the Councillors said that they felt that they should vote in line with Planning Officers’ recommendations, ergo this application should be approved.

    James mentions that there are more than 300 objections ‘against’, but it must be remembered just how well resourced and organised ThWART are in its dogged resistance to any wind turbines on the Island. As is usual, those who object are much more likely to voice concerns than those who approve of turbines (83% nationally).

    From personal experience (with Ventnor Golf Club’s application)I know just how most objectors use misleading and, yes, false propaganda to try to persuade others. Despite this, VGC had a two-thirds majority of comments in favour at the consultation stage and yet still the Officers recommended refusal!

    I applaud the Officers’ recommendation for Betty Haunt Lane and I hope that, after next Monday’s meeting, there will at last be a real hope of turbines on the Island.

    Reply
    • tryme's comment is rated +2 Vote +1 Vote -1

      3.Jan.2013 9:05pm

      I don’t think it tells us about the support for any local, specific turbine application, to tell us some national statistic. ( And I would want to know the context & detail of any such survey).

      Perhaps there’s a reason ThWART is “well resourced & organised”, (if that is the case): like, they get a lot of support here! Good for them. I daresay there are influential & well resourced parties on the other side too.

      It is true that not everyone who opposes something has the wherewithal to join a pressure group & devote the necessary time to that. Thank goodness some can, though, & are able to represent many others’ views.

      Reply
    • James Luke's comment is rated +5 Vote +1 Vote -1

      3.Jan.2013 9:25pm

      Stewart – 6 months ago I would have been one of the 83%! Even now I can’t say that I have an informed view on wind farms as I have not researched and do not understand the issues.

      My experience with the asphalt application is that objectors are far from well resourced and organised when compared to major multi-nationals supported by planning consultants, lawyers and PR departments. Large corporations employ professional lobbying companies and have access to politicians at local and national levels. Our own Council Leader just happens to be a consultant for one such organisation.

      Having observed the conduct of a major planning application for the first time I have to say that I am shocked and concerned. The planning process should take into account local opinion (as intended in the Localism Act) and ordinary people should be able to trust their elected officials to protect their interests.

      I suspect that in the next few years many more of the 83% will find themselves drawn into these situations ….. many like me will find the lack of local consideration undemocratic and extremely disturbing.

      Reply
    • tryme's comment is rated +1 Vote +1 Vote -1

      3.Jan.2013 10:40pm

      Presumably Stewart Blackmore would hold ThWART’s views in high esteem if it were poverty stricken & disorganised, (strange to find that being organised’s an offence). Or then again, would he then be glad to steamroller over it. Difficult to say, isn’t it….

      Reply
    • greenfiremouse's comment is rated +2 Vote +1 Vote -1

      3.Jan.2013 10:41pm

      Let’s face it: The people behind ThWART and similar organisations have massive business interests in other aspects of the energy market, and not only in the UK.

      Reply
      • tryme's comment not rated yet. Add your vote Vote +1 Vote -1

        3.Jan.2013 10:50pm

        ‘Let’s face it’, people don’t want wind turbines disfiguring their lives in the various ways they can do….. And when you are up against powerful interests supporting turbines, you need people behind you who understand their world.

        Reply
        • Stewart Blackmore's comment is rated +3 Vote +1 Vote -1

          3.Jan.2013 11:05pm

          Tryme, The figure of 83% is well documented elsewhere, whether you choose to believe it or not.

          I do not hold ThWART’S position in any kind of esteem given the record of those who founded it.

          Its connections to the Conservatives is also well documented and, despite the past protestations of Messrs Pugh & Brown, it has the ear of the ruling group at County Hall. Mr Brown is particularly keen on the biomass plant going ahead, you can be assured of that.

          Indeed, if it (ThWART) were honest, it would declare that its objection to turbines is purely commercial, as its founders are involved with the proposed biomass plant on the banks of the Medina.

          Honest opposition is one thing but ThWART’s is something entirely different.

          Reply
          • tryme's comment is rated +1 Vote +1 Vote -1

            4.Jan.2013 9:57am

            One of my points about the 83% is that it’s a national figure, not a local one, Stewart Blackmore.

            You’re probably not in a position to say that all those who oppose turbines on the Island have a commercial interest in it – not me for one. Incidentally, just because people have put their money where their mouth & belief is, does not mean we should be derogatory about their involvement. (Likely the reverse).It’s arguing the case that matters.

            Speaking of ThWART as though there are no dubious goings-on amongst supporters of , is reducing

  4. downwind resident's comment is rated +2 Vote +1 Vote -1

    3.Jan.2013 9:50pm

    With the three minutes only to speak at the Planning Committee shared between all the objectors and no right to reply the system is somewhat skewed.

    Will the Environmental Health Department be allowed to attend this Planning Committee and speak?

    We didn’t see them in attendance at the Isle of Wight Grain Storage Biomass Boiler Planning Committee!

    Reply
    • tryme's comment not rated yet. Add your vote Vote +1 Vote -1

      4.Jan.2013 10:02am

      …As I was saying (!), speaking of ThWART as though there are no dubious goings-on amongst supporters of turbines, is reducing what should be rational argument to a case of who can smear each others’ motives most effectively. Take note of James Luke’s experiences….

      Reply
  5. Black Dog's comment is rated +8 Vote +1 Vote -1

    4.Jan.2013 2:25am

    IOW Council officers and members of the planning committee please note:

    “Planners must not ignore local communities who oppose windfarms, warns minister Nick Boles”

    Source: Daily Mail 04.01.13

    Reply
  6. D.s's comment not rated yet. Add your vote Vote +1 Vote -1

    7.Jan.2013 2:22pm

    I am so fed up with you people now. The very reason franking is on the horizon is because we won’t move on and start THINKING ABOUT OUR FUTURE AND OUR CHILDRENS FUTURE. But no you all worry about your pretty view of our (unspoilt natural countryside). Take a look on Google earth at the island. There is nothing natural about the island landscape. SORT IT OUT PEOPLE. What do you people expect us to do when sea levels rise, we run out of oil. Oh that’s right you probably won’t be alive so why should it matter to you,but don’t worry we will sort it all out when the time comes. I really hope this application happens for the good of the island and so we can show that this is in fact an eco island.

    Reply
    • cynic's comment not rated yet. Add your vote Vote +1 Vote -1

      7.Jan.2013 7:52pm

      @D ” The very reason franking is on the horizon is because we won’t move on ”

      The Franks are already here with the French government’s owning EDF! :-))##Presumably you mean “fracking”?

      Reply
      • D.s's comment not rated yet. Add your vote Vote +1 Vote -1

        7.Jan.2013 10:28pm

        Yeah fracking auto correct on my phone buggered up again. Reading back I think I may have been in a bit of a bad mood :-P

        Reply
    • tryme's comment not rated yet. Add your vote Vote +1 Vote -1

      7.Jan.2013 8:44pm

      That hectoring tone only detracts from anything you may have to say, D.s…..

      Reply
  7. No.5's comment is rated +1 Vote +1 Vote -1

    7.Jan.2013 7:05pm

    Change of heart…refused due to noise issues…despite nearest estblishments being working farms

    Reply

Add comment

Login to your account.
If you do not have an account, reserve your own name and receive exclusive special offers - just sign up for an On The Wight account

.