Agenda item

A major full application for the erection of a wind turbine (maximum height to blade tip 78 metres) with associated access tracks, crane pad, sub-station building, underground cabling and temporary construction compound. [Derwent Ward].

Consideration was given to a major full application for the erection of a wind turbine (maximum height to blade tip 78 metres) with associated access tracks, crane pad, sub station building, underground cabling and temporary construction compound.

Officers gave a brief update to advise that since the Committee Report was prepared and published a further letter of representation has been received objecting to the proposal on the grounds of impact on the open character of the Green Belt and the habitat of rare birds of prey.

Lynn Wilmore had registered to speak as a Local Resident. She raised concerns about the potential for low frequency noise and the impact this could have on residents. She felt that the noise assessment had not gone far enough and the appropriate limit would be breached at the nearest noise sensitive property.

Fergus Wilmore had registered to speak as a Local Resident. He advised that turbines were not suitable for flat land and raised concerns about the potential for strobing effects from the reflection as the blades rotate.

Mrs Ward had registered to speak as a Local Resident. She advised that the turbine would have far reaching consequences for Kexby and Dunnington and queried why this site had been chosen when it wasn’t viable in terms of wind speed. She felt that none of the residents concerns had been fully addressed by the applicant.

John Ray spoke as a Local Resident and as the County Mammal Recorder. he raised concerns about the impact of the turbine on wildlife in the area, in particular on Owls and Bats. The applicants bat survey had focused on numbers of bats in the area rather than the impact on individual bats and the fact there is evidence from other areas of the UK that turbines are harmful to bats.

Marianne McCallum spoke as the applicants agent. She advised that the Government applies significant weight to renewable energy resources and York as an area is underperforming in terms of renewable energy and the turbine offers an opportunity for York to play a part. In her opinion the proposed location of the Green Belt would not impact on the rural setting and there had been no issues identified relating to residential amenity, traffic, ecology, heritage or aviation.

Julian Sturdy MP spoke to advise that the National Planning Policy Framework advises against wind turbines being located within Green Belts. In relation to very special circumstances and the financial viability of the farm, no information had been supplied by the applicant relating to this, nor any information to suggest other options had been considered such as solar energy sources which may be less prominent.

Councillor Brooks had registered to speak as Ward Member. She advised that the turbine would be a blight to one of York’s important green corridors. She referred to a nearby nature reserve and rare birds such as buzzards that may be harmed.  She pointed out that the nearest property to the turbine would be 700m away and that Scotland does not allow turbines within 1km of property and that there must be a reason for that.

Members queried a number of points as follows:

·        The likely impact of noise from the turbine upon local residents. The Council’s Environmental Protection Officer spoke in depth to provide Members with information on acceptable noise levels at night and advised that if noise was a problem it could be dealt with by way of condition.

·        Further details regarding the Ministry of Defence response to the application. Officers advised that the MOD had agreed that conditions could be imposed to ensure any impact from the turbine be adequately mitigated.

·        The risk to health from strobe and flicker caused by turbines. Officers confirmed that this is an area which is still being studied but it is understood that measures such as matt paint can help prevent it.

Members entered debate and made the following comments:

·        Concerns about setting a precedent for turbines in the Green Belt.

·        It was acknowledged that York does need renewable energy supplies but it was questioned if this was the right location for a turbine.

·        Although a number of objections had now been overcome since the application was deferred, the turbine is still close to property and the officers advice is to refuse due to the green belt location.

·        The reasons for refusal since the application came before the committee previously, still remained.

Resolved:           That the application be refused.

Reason:              The proposal constitutes inappropriate development within the Green Belt and is therefore by definition harmful to the openness of the Green Belt contrary to paragraph 91 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy GB1 of the Draft 2005 York Development Control Local Plan . It would furthermore cause serious harm to the purposes of including land within the Green Belt specifically the safeguarding of the setting of the historic City and the prevention of encroachment upon open countryside by virtue of its extreme height and solid engineered urbanised appearance.