Nosterfield End wind turbine recommended for approval
Tuesday, 24th December 2013.
The arrival of a giant wind turbine on the edge of Haverhill has been brought a step closer with a recommendation that the plan be given approval by St Edmundsbury Borough Council.
The council's development control committee is to debate the issue on January 2, but the recommendation from planning officers is now to approve.
The proposal, from farmer James Sills, for a wind turbine at Nosterfield End, had caused huge controversy earlier this year, with objecting residents descending en masse to a Haverhill Town Council planning meeting to enlist the support of members.
But it appeared to have foundered through objections from the the National Air Transport Safeguarding body NATS and from Stansted Airport, because the turbine would cause interference with their radar.
However, they are now agreeing to implement a modification to their system called 'radar blanking' which can obviate any problem caused by small wind generation structures such has this of just the one turbine.
The structure would be like one of those which now stand at Wadlow Farm near Balsham and planners acknowledge it will have a significant impact on the view of residents in 12 properties at Hazel Stub and Nosterfield End.
But the report concludes: "It is not considered that these impacts would be so injurious to the amenities of local residents or the landscape to warrant a refusal.
"It is not considered that the proposed scheme would be detrimental to wildlife, aviation, cultural assets or to the wider locality.
"Furthermore, significant weight in support of the scheme must be given to the fact that it provides renewable energy on a site and within a scheme which are ostensibly available, viable, and technologically suitable for such purposes."
Predictably the plan has brought a string of objections, particularly from one of Haverhill's UKIP Suffolk county councillors Julian Flood, who has stated one of his main aims in politics is opposition to wind energy generation.
He urges the application to be refused because he says it is based on erroneous calculation of the amount of energy the turbine will provide.
He says a similar error was made with a single turbine application near Clare, recently approved by the committee, and he calls for that to be recalled and new calculations to be made.
But the committee members are being recommended to approve, with a large number of conditions intended to mitigate an impact on nearby residents in such things as TV reception, to be paid for by the applicant.
It is accepted that the turbine will totally dominate a section of the Ladygate Woods public footpath, but officers consider this would only be a brief experience for passing walkers.
Local wildlife organisations have confirmed they have no concerns about any detrimental effect on nearby birds or animals.
The turbine would operate for 25 years and then have to be removed unless permanent permission is sought at a later date.
The council's development control committee is to debate the issue on January 2, but the recommendation from planning officers is now to approve.
The proposal, from farmer James Sills, for a wind turbine at Nosterfield End, had caused huge controversy earlier this year, with objecting residents descending en masse to a Haverhill Town Council planning meeting to enlist the support of members.
But it appeared to have foundered through objections from the the National Air Transport Safeguarding body NATS and from Stansted Airport, because the turbine would cause interference with their radar.
However, they are now agreeing to implement a modification to their system called 'radar blanking' which can obviate any problem caused by small wind generation structures such has this of just the one turbine.
The structure would be like one of those which now stand at Wadlow Farm near Balsham and planners acknowledge it will have a significant impact on the view of residents in 12 properties at Hazel Stub and Nosterfield End.
But the report concludes: "It is not considered that these impacts would be so injurious to the amenities of local residents or the landscape to warrant a refusal.
"It is not considered that the proposed scheme would be detrimental to wildlife, aviation, cultural assets or to the wider locality.
"Furthermore, significant weight in support of the scheme must be given to the fact that it provides renewable energy on a site and within a scheme which are ostensibly available, viable, and technologically suitable for such purposes."
Predictably the plan has brought a string of objections, particularly from one of Haverhill's UKIP Suffolk county councillors Julian Flood, who has stated one of his main aims in politics is opposition to wind energy generation.
He urges the application to be refused because he says it is based on erroneous calculation of the amount of energy the turbine will provide.
He says a similar error was made with a single turbine application near Clare, recently approved by the committee, and he calls for that to be recalled and new calculations to be made.
But the committee members are being recommended to approve, with a large number of conditions intended to mitigate an impact on nearby residents in such things as TV reception, to be paid for by the applicant.
It is accepted that the turbine will totally dominate a section of the Ladygate Woods public footpath, but officers consider this would only be a brief experience for passing walkers.
Local wildlife organisations have confirmed they have no concerns about any detrimental effect on nearby birds or animals.
The turbine would operate for 25 years and then have to be removed unless permanent permission is sought at a later date.
Comment on this story
[board listing] [login] [register]
You must be logged in to post messages. (login now)