| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Barrow turbine rejection praised
Credit: North-West Evening Mail, www.nwemail.co.uk 14 December 2011 ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Plans for a wind turbine near Furness Abbey have been rejected.
Barrow Borough Council’s planning committee chose to unanimously refuse a proposal for a 48–metre turbine at Bowesfield Farm in Stank.
But an application for a 42-metre turbine on the Askam Road side of the farm was accepted.
Planning officer Jason Hipkiss said the applications were at “opposite ends of the scale” in terms of their effect on the landscape.
The committee received objections to both of John Hornby’s applications from residents of Stank, Dalton and Newton.
Andrew Taylor, a professional geotechnical consultant from Parkhouse Court in Barrow, said he didn’t believe the Stank turbine would benefit anyone but the applicant.
Mr Taylor said: “The scheme is proposed as masquerading as a green energy scheme. I believe it isn’t. It is a commercial development which is for financial gain.”
Anthony Smith, of Johnson Street in Newton, said residents’ main concern with the Stank application was the noise. He said: “Whatever way the wind is blowing, the residents are likely to have a problem with noise.”
Alan Stoker, a member of Furness Wind Turbine Action Group, called for the committee to protect the Furness countryside.
Mr Stoker said: “I beg you now and in the future to vote for the good of Furness on all of these applications.”
Askam Road resident Phil Newbury said the application for the turbine near his house would only power 90 kettles at its full output.
Dominic Cooney, of development company CMS UK, spoke on Mr Hornby’s behalf for both applications and tried to address concerns.
A crowd of around 50 people burst into applause when the group chose to reject the Stank application, with members raising concerns the turbine would be visible from Furness Abbey.
But the Askam Road application was accepted after members chose to back Mr Hipkiss’ recommendation the turbine would have little negative impact on the area. He said: “We have got a location here which is filled with manmade structures and activity.”
This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.
The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.
| Wind Watch relies entirely on User Contributions |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URL: https://wind-watch.org/news/?p=16714 ]
