| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Reports incomplete, reveals environmental health on turbines
Credit: The Fraserburgh Herald | www.fraserburghherald.co.uk 16 September 2012 ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Councillors deferred two wind turbine applications that were presented to them on Tuesday morning, following revelations that environmental health had not yet completed a full report on the proposals.
Fraserburgh and district councillor Brian Topping announced his feelings by saying that he was surprised to see them even on the agenda.
Meanwhile, Troup councillor Hamish Partridge commented that he had concerns that applications were being pushed through due to a backlog.
Applications 9D and 9E both reported that environmental health had not yet replied to the consultation process.
Application 9D, which was for the planning permission of a 45.5 metre tall wind turbine at Raffanshaugh, Gamrie, was the first to be deferred, with both councillors Topping and Partridge raising concerns over environmental health’s incomplete report.
With items to be discussed that were exempt to the public and press, the area committee pressed ahead to the final planning application before the public were asked to leave at around 11:30am.
As discussions began concerning application 9E, for full planning permission of a 34.2 metre tall turbine, also at Gamrie, environmental health announced that the item had the same ‘issues’ as the previous planning application, and was swiftly deferred by the area committee so that the service could complete a full report on the proposals.
The press and public were then asked to leave as the committee prepared to discuss exempt matters.
Planners had recommended that councillors refuse planning permission for the turbine at Rafanshaugh, the report stating: “The wind turbine proposed would be located in an obtrusive and exposed location within the surrounding landscape and thus be detrimental to the visual amenity and character of this coastal farmland landscape.”
The report also stated that the cumulative impact of the proposal in the area, which has existing turbines, would be detrimental.
The wind turbine application for the 34.2 metre tall turbine at Easter Cushnie, 9E, was also recommended to be refused by the planners for the same reasons.
Before the break, two other wind turbine proposals were refused by councillors, with a site visit scheduled to a third proposed turbine location.
Councillors refused, with eight votes, the erection of two 46.5 metre tall turbines at Balgreenfield, and the erection of one 79 metre turbine at Easter Jackston.
The councillors will, however, visit the site of a proposed two turbine build at Fairburn before making their decision on the proposal at a future area committee meeting.
The proposal is for two 45.7 metre tall wind turbines and associated infrastructure at the site.
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=28054 ]
