Objectors ‘must write again’ say planners
Credit: By Andrew Robinson | Yorkshire Post | 13 November 2013 | www.yorkshirepost.co.uk ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Villages who have objected to plans for a wind turbine have been told they must write to the council a second time – because the plan has changed.
Residents in Lower Cumberworth, Denby Dale, Shelley and Shepley, near Huddersfield, fear plans for a single turbine on land off Coal Pit Lane, Lower Cumberworth, will spoil views and be a blot on the landscape, much of which is rural.
Objectors believe as many as 200 people have written to Kirklees Council to oppose the plan.
The developer has withdrawn the application and submitted another with a lower power output.
Members of Huddersfield Against Large Turbines are annoyed at having to restate their opposition.
Spokeswoman Louise Taylor said: “We were shocked to hear that Kirklees planning are discounting letters of objection and objectors will have to write again.”
She said the process appeared to help neutralise opposition.
“The ‘new’ application is identical to the previous application, in almost every aspect, with only the wattage amended and HALT feel all objections based on all other issues should still be considered.
“Kirklees planning are exercising their ‘discretionary’ powers and refusing to do so and insist all objectors must write again, repeating their reasons for opposing the turbine.”
A council spokesman said: “As the council has received a new application for a turbine it has to ensure the procedures are followed correctly.
“This application is not for an identical proposal to that previously submitted and the council is therefore not in a position to assume that those who objected to or supported the proposal last time still do so now.”
He added: “New representations will need to be submitted for this application but there are many ways to do this including through email at planning.contactcentre@kirklees.gov.uk and the council’s website.”
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: