Campaigners' joy after temporary masts rejected (From The Advertiser Series)
Send us your pictures, video, news and views by texting NORTHERN ECHO to 80360 or email us
Campaigners' joy after temporary masts rejected
10:50am Wednesday 5th September 2012 in News
By Lizzie Anderson
CAMPAIGNERS fighting to stop the creation of a 24-turbine wind farm in County Durham reacted with delight after plans were refused for temporary masts.
Energy firm E.ON had sought permission for two 80m anemometer masts to monitor wind speed and direction on land close to the A1, near Newton Aycliffe,
County Durham, where it hopes to build The Isles Wind Farm.
However, members of Durham County Council’s planning committee rejected the application yesterday, citing the impact on a landscape protected within the Sedgefield Borough Plan.
Councillor Mike Dixon highlighted how the second phase of consultation for The Isles was drawing to a close, adding: “What is the point - that is what I want to know?
"Surely for them to get this far through the process they must know the site is suitable for a wind farm. It seems to me this application is coming at the wrong time.”
Coun George Richardson, meanwhile, said putting temporary masts in a sensitive landscape would be “sacrilegious.”
Susan Fox, of campaign group The Isles Community Turbine Action Campaign (Tictac), spoke against the application during the meeting at County Hall.
She said E.ONs application had been flawed, with gaps in the design and access statement making it hard for the public to visualize the masts. Mrs Fox also questioned why importance had been attached to the temporary nature of the masts, which would be in place for up to two years.
“A prominent industrial structure is unacceptable in this location regardless of how long it is there,” she said. “If it is unsuitable in an environment it is unsuitable. If there was an application for a 80m mast on Palace Green in front of Durham Cathedral for two years or even two weeks of course it would be turned down.”
However, planning officer Allan Simpson said planners had adequate information. He described the masts as slim and lightweight and said the impact on the landscape would be minimal.
Speaking after the meeting, Mrs Fox said she was “surprised and delighted” at the outcome.
Comments(4)
vince.crosby
says...
11:18pm Wed 5 Sep 12
John Justice
says...
3:17am Thu 6 Sep 12
notoeonontheisles
says...
6:06am Thu 6 Sep 12
What is still extremely concerning is why the planning officers approved this proposal in the first place.
Surely their job is to ensure any application submitted is complete. I stand by my views that if this application was from a private individual it would have been rejected.
Allan Simpson said "planners had adequate information. He described the masts as slim and lightweight and said the impact on the landscape would be minimal."
Who is Allan Simpson representing in his role at Durham County Council? E.ON or the people of County Durham? How can an 80m tower (x2) with beacons, guide ropes and bird delfectors be described as slim and lightweight? They will be seen for miles around in a protected landscape. Why would he even choose to use the words - slim / lightweight. The application does not state this. Therefore, he as an individual must have a preference for the masts. Why?
The Planning officers need to be held to account here. The public needs to ask WHY? What is going on? Remember, you pay their wages.
Green Not Greed says...
12:51pm Wed 5 Sep 12
Mr Allan Simpson, how on earth can you say 80mtr high masts fitted with a light, which would be visable for miles, cannot impact on the landscape?