| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Controversial Princes Gate turbines to face court challenge again
Credit: Western Telegraph | 29th October 2013 | www.westerntelegraph.co.uk ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
The controversial proposal for south Pembrokeshire’s tallest wind turbines is facing another legal hurdle.
In May, Pembrokeshire County Council approved the plan by Princes Gate Spring Water for a pair of 86.5 metres high, 800kw turbines, which the company want to install to help power its new, state-of-the-art, bottle-blowing plant
This was the second time that the plan had been given the go-ahead by the authority’s planning committee. Last November, residents threatened a judicial review and in February, the plan was quashed after the council decided not to contest the challenge.
Now an application by objectors for a second judicial review has been accepted by the High Court following May’s decision to allow the turbines at Middleton Top, Ludchurch. This is close to an historic medieval site and the Belle Vue equestrian establishment, whose owners have been told that their public liability insurance would be affected if the turbines were erected.
“The residents warned the committee when the plans were passed that there were serious flaws in the recommendation for approval and that this would end up at judicial review, and that has been confirmed today,” said resident Sue Bound.
She said that the residents were ‘delighted’ at the news, but added: “The bad news is that – for the second time – the taxpayers will end up paying out in the region of £35,000 to £50,000, on top of the £30,000 paid out following last year’s quashing order from the High Court.”
When the planning application came before the committee in February on the second occasion, the plan was dubbed ‘an unacceptable and doomed proposal’ by the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales.
CPRW’s Pembrokeshire chairman, Mary Sinclair, warned at the time : “If this is passed once more, the council will simply find that the many remaining and still unresolved procedural and factual errors in the proposal will just keep recurring.
“Further judicial reviews will ensue, and will prevail, with the same results.”
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 Funding |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URL: https://wind-watch.org/news/?p=58145 ]
