| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Controversial turbine plan thrown out by council
Credit: By Graeme Hetherington | The Northern Echo | 27 November 2014 | www.thenorthernecho.co.uk ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Campaigners opposed to an application to erect a 100m wind turbine in east Cleveland have been backed by councillors.
Members of Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council’s regulatory committee were urged to reject planning officers’ advice and refuse permission to build the unit on Kilton Thorpe Lane, Brotton.
The application was called in by the committee after word councillor Steve Kay implored members to reject the scheme.
In a letter read out at this morning’s meeting (Thursday, November 27), he said: “The proliferation of wind turbines is a danger to bird life. Between the coast and the North York Moors, and with two large reservoirs, East Cleveland is a corridor for migratory birds.
“If permission for this wind turbine were granted, it would strengthen the precedent for yet more of these abominations in East Cleveland.
“There are already two wind turbines in Lockwood ward and a further has been granted permission. Two others, including this one at Kilton Thorpe Lane, are at the planning stage. This is far too many wind turbines for a small area to sustain.”
Councillor Bill Suthers, who was speaking in his role as a member of the North York Moors National Park Authority, claimed the turbine would have a detrimental on tourism in the region.
He said: “It’s our duty to do all we can to protect the beauty of the national park.”
Terry Cox, a Redcar and Cleveland member of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said: “This is an industrial size turbine. It’s a 328 feet high blight on a tranquil rural landscape and it must be ruled as inappropriate for the area. I implore the councillors to use their innate sense of right and wrong and reject this application.”
Jason McGray, of applicant TNEI Services, said that only two written objections had been submitted by residents living in the area of the site, adding: “The local community as a whole is not against the proposal.”
Committee member Peter Spencer proposed that the application was rejected.
His motion was seconded by Cllr Valerie Halton who raised concerns about the cumulative affect with several similar applications being approved in the east Cleveland area.
Cllr Mary Lanigan said: “I’m not against wind turbines, but what we seem to be getting at the moment is agents and developers coming to the Redcar and Cleveland area and using it a dumping ground and it’s not fair.”
The application was unanimously rejected by members.
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=68316 ]
| Tag: Victories |
