[ exact phrase in "" • ~10 sec • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]

LOCATION/TYPE

News Home
Archive
RSS

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Height move on turbines set to fail  

A motion put forward by an anti-wind turbine councillor to stop structures over 75m tall being built in west Norfolk looks set to be rejected by the council.

Independent councillor David Markinson had put forward the motion in regards to the council’s approach to future planning applications for developments over 75m in height.

The motion will be discussed by West Norfolk council’s cabinet at their meeting on April 1, but the cabinet is asked to reject it as it would ‘undermine’ the council’s position.

Mr Markinson has been one of the campaigners at the forefront of trying to stop a potential wind farm being built in the village of Marshland St James.

He stood as an Independent anti- wind farm candidate in the Mershe Lande ward last year and defeated west Norfolk’s Labour leader, Jack Bantoft, who had held the seat for more than 18 years.

His reason for putting forward the motion was to protect the “visual and general appearance of the countryside”.

A report to the council said: “Although this is a blanket policy that will apply to any development, in reality, this resolution is only likely to affect proposals for new wind turbines.

“The council could not refuse to register planning applications relating to wind farms or any other form of tall development, even if this resolution were to be adopted.

“By adopting a blanket presumption against all schemes regardless of their merits the council would fail in its responsibilities to determine applications fairly and without bias.”

It concluded: “There is both a reputational risk to the council associated with adopting this resolution and a financial risk of having to engage in legal proceedings or with the Ombudsman arising from receiving an award of costs on appeal.”

Cabinet members are urged to reject the motion when they meet next month.

Eastern Daily Press

21 March 2008

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate

Share:


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook

Share

CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.
Share

Wind Watch on Facebook

Follow Wind Watch on Twitter