|
Additional comments received objecting to proposal
Additional comments supporting refusal were
received from ThWART suggesting that the following additional reasons for refusal
should be considered – wildlife, noise, TV interference, grid connection,
public consultation, listed buildings and tourism.
ThWART had consistently
raised concerns over the accuracy of claims made by the applicant and in the
report there appeared little acknowledgement that the claims made by the
applicant were likely to be made in the most advantageous way. The report
discounted as a reason for refusal any questions over the true benefits of
the proposal.
In summary, ThWART had
significant concerns with the report and the recommendations and wished to
make it clear that they believed it contained significant errors and
omissions which tended to make it misleading, and those errors and other
statements implied a lack of impartiality in the document.
An additional letter was received from the
Orchards Holiday Caravan and Camping Park expressing concern that
little emphasis had been put on tourism and traffic delays during
construction. It was suggested that, to draw a comparison between this application
and the existing wind farms in Cornwall was ludicrous.
An e mail was received
from the British Horse Society confirming that its guidelines for the safe distance
of wind turbines from bridle ways were 200m or three times the height from
base to tip of the turbine. In this instance, the turbines would be close to
bridleways and the proposed distance was 90m which was considered to be far
too close.
An email had been received
from the Isle of Wight branch of the CPRE expressing concern that there seemed
to have been some confusion between the submissions of the Hampshire and Isle
of Wight branches. In the chart which appeared in the report, the concerns of
CPRE - Isle of Wight were listed as visual effects affecting mainly the
Solent and New Forest National Park.
CPRE -Isle of Wight requested that it be noted that those comments
came from the Hampshire branch. For
clarification purposes, the objection of CPRE - Isle of Wight included visual
impact from the Island AONB and Newtown Nature Reserve, economic impact on
tourism, including walking, horse riding, hang-gliding and local
accommodation, effect on local residents, including noise, flicker, TV and
mobile phone reception and exacerbation of flooding and highway risks, lack
of information on cabling and decommissioning.
A letter was received from a
Sandown resident indicating that they would be unable to attend the meeting
but reiterating their support for ThWART as there were considered to be other
ways of saving energy in order to maintain much of the beauty of the Isle of
Wight.
Additional comments in
support of proposal
SEEDA considered that there
was clear regional policy framework as set out in the regional economic
strategy to promote the development and provision of renewable and clean
energy as a contribution towards the following target:
“Reduce CO²
emissions attributable to the southeast by 20% of 2003 baseline by 2016, and
increase the contribution of renewable energy to overall energy supply in the
southeast, to meet national targets of 10% of electricity demand by 2010 and
aspire to achieve 20% by 2020.”
SEEDA commented that the
wind turbine proposal at Wellow, whilst small in scale, would contribute to
the UK’s target and requirement for energy produced by renewable resources. Furthermore,
they considered that the economic benefit of supporting the proposal was the
very clear message it would send to investors that the Isle of Wight was a
forward thinking location with a positive attitude towards innovation,
sustainability and to retaining and attracting new investment.
SEEDA’s key concern was how
a decision either way might be received by the industry sector and investors
directly involved in renewable technology, composites development, etc. and
particularly by those companies based on the Island. In this respect Vestas
Blade UK Limited was one of the key companies that formed the valuable
composite cluster, including GKN and Gurit. That sector was critical for
future growth on the Island because of the emphasis on R&D activity and
high value jobs. The growth of that sector had contributed to the strong
economic growth on the Island, currently around 4.5% and Vestas accounted for
over 10% of that growth directly.
Whilst the planning application was not being made by Vestas, it was
understood there was a commitment by Your Energy to source the turbine blades
from Vestas and that there was also an agreement in place to use one of the
turbines for further R&D purposes.
SEEDA acknowledged that the
proposed wind farm would be small order for Vests but the fact that it would
facilitate development of the local and potential UK market would signal a
very positive position to the company and its supply chain. Would be a
decision that would reassure companies in the sector that it was worth
continuing to make the high level of investment they made on the Island.
SEEDA considered that to be
a key opportunity for the Island to show proactive and responsible leadership
in addressing some very challenging issues both for the Island and the regions
future prosperity.
Three emails received in
support of proposal raised the following issues :
Important that every effort was made to invest in as much renewable
energy as possible and especially in view of the vulnerable nature of the
Island with regard to sea level change.
Important to support an industry which was a very significant provider
of Island employment.
Vast majority of
people support wind farms and were quite used to seeing them around the West
Country, Wales and Scotland.
Proposal would improve image of Island to outsiders
Every effort must be made to reduce CO² emissions.
Wind turbines were not considered to be destructive
to the environment but were superbly engineered objects of elegance and
considerable beauty.
The Crime and Disorder Officer was contacted he
did not consider there were any Crime and Disorder implications associated
with the operation of the wind farm,
but was concerned there could be crime and disorder associated during the
construction period.
Updated comments were received from Natural
England which now comprised of English Nature and the Countryside
Agency. In terms of the original
objections from the Countryside Agency they were maintaining their objections
to the landscape impact. In terms of
impact on birds the proposal had been the subject of an appropriate
assessment the result of that assessment, which had been agreed with English
Nature, was that the impact on birds would be acceptable and would not
adversely impact on the integrity of the special protection area. Their objection with regard to bats was
maintained.
Two letters were received from Mr Steve Cowley,
one as local resident and the other as a councillor for Yarmouth Town
Council.
A copy of a letter from a Burton Lattimer residence
to the applicant supporting the application was read out.
A letter of support from the Burton Lattimer Town
Council was read out.
Results of a survey carried out by Your Energy
was submitted, of the 545 responses received the majority supported renewable
energy.
Isle of Wight Radio conducted a survey whereby
78% said the application should be approved.
|
