Help To Arm People
With The Truth & Facts
To Make Their Case & Defend Themselves
PS – 65:
(PS-65: GL-W > Mark Harper MP Thanks + Some Precedent examples)
To: MARK HARPER MP <email@example.com>; Mark Harper MP for The Forest of Dean <HarperM@Parliament.UK>; ‘National Planning Casework Unit’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Secretary of State Greg Clark MP <GregClarkMP@parliament.UK>; email@example.com; PRIVATE EMAIL ADDRESSES REDACTED; Cllr Helen Molyneux <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Helen MOLYNEUX <Helen.Molyneux@fdean.gov.uk>
From: Greg Lance-Watkins (Greg_L-W)
Stroat Community Comment On Wind Turbine FoDDC #P0365/15/FUL
further to the meeting you were willing to have with myself and four other members of the effected community, relative to the dubious planning application for a giant wind turbine at Severndale Farm, Stroat on the open flats ajoining the River Severn, some 100 feet plus taller than Gloucester Cathedral, which I clearly denounced as ultra viries and a corruption of due process and deeply suspect, as I was able to factually show.
I thank you for your time and note your reticence to become involved and thank you for breaking with your normal policy of remaining on the fence and actually having written bringing certain of our concerns, with which you had sympathy, to the attention of the Minister concerned Greg Clarke MP of whom we have made detailed application to have the plans ‘Called In’, based upon what we consider to be sound planning grounds.
Please note the article below, which I have sourced, followed by its links one and two. I trust this will assist you in any further assistance you can provide as the MP for the directly effected community, who by a notable majority reject this application on sound planning grounds:
Clark rules that wind appeal fails to satisfy new community backing test
15 September 2015 by Jamie Carpenter , Be the First to Comment
Communities secretary Greg Clark has refused permission for a scheme comprising ten wind turbines in Lincolnshire, ruling that the project had failed to comply with strict new rules requiring such proposals to address the planning impacts identified by affected local communities.
Onshore wind: new written statement rules applied in recovered appeal decision (picture by Vieve Forward, Geograph)
Energy firm RWE Innogy had appealed against the decision of West Lindsey District Council to in November 2013 refuse to grant permission for the application to build ten wind turbines on land north of Hemswell Cliff, Lincolnshire.
In a decision letter issued this week, Clark agreed with the conclusions and recommendation of inspector Paul Jackson, who recommended that the appeal be dismissed. An alternative scheme comprising eight turbines was also rejected.
In his decision letter, Clark said that he had attached “substantial weight” to a written ministerial statement issued in June, which set out new tests for local authorities to apply when determining applications for wind energy development involving one or more turbines.
The written statement said that local planning authorities should only grant permission if the development site is in an area identified as suitable for wind energy development in a local or neighbourhood plan, and following consultation, “it can be demonstrated that the planning impacts identified by affected local communities have been fully addressed and therefore the proposal has their backing”.
In his decision on the Lincolnshire appeal, Clark applied transitional arrangements for where a wind application had already been submitted to a local planning authority at the date on which the statement was made and the development plan does not identify suitable sites.
In such instances, the letter said, local authorities can find proposals acceptable if they are satisfied that planning impacts identified by local communities have been addressed, and that therefore the proposal has their backing.
Clark’s letter said that. having applied the transitional arrangements to the Lincolnshire scheme, he “is not satisfied that the planning impacts identified by affected local communities have been addressed”.
The letter said that there had been “extensive involvement” of the local population throughout the process. Affected communities had expressed concerns about harm to the landscape, visual amenity and the setting of heritage assets, “and it is clear from the inspector’s report that those planning impacts have not been addressed”, Clark’s letter added.
It said: “As those planning impacts as identified by the affected communities have not been addressed, the proposed scheme would not meet the transitional arrangements set out in the written ministerial statement, and the secretary of state gives significant weight to this.”
Clark’s letter concluded that the “combined adverse impacts” of the scheme would “significantly and demonstrably outweigh” its benefits.
House of Commons: Written Statement (HCWS42)
Department for Communities and Local Government
Written Statement made by:
Secretary of State for Communities and Local
Government (Greg Clark)
on 18 Jun 2015.
I am today setting out new considerations to be applied to proposed wind energy development so
that local people have the final say on wind farm applications, fulfilling the commitment made in
the Conservative election manifesto.
Subject to the transitional provision set out below, these considerations will take effect from 18
June and should be taken into account in planning decisions. I am also making a limited number
of consequential changes to planning guidance.
When determining planning applications for wind energy development involving one or more wind
turbines, local planning authorities should only grant planning permission if:
- the development site is in an area identified as suitable for wind energy development in a Local
or Neighbourhood Plan; and
- following consultation, it can be demonstrated that the planning impacts identified by affected
local communities have been fully addressed and therefore the proposal has their backing.
In applying these new considerations, suitable areas for wind energy development will need to
have been allocated clearly in a Local or Neighbourhood Plan. Maps showing the wind resource
as favourable to wind turbines, or similar, will not be sufficient. Whether a proposal has the
backing of the affected local community is a planning judgement for the local planning authority.
Where a valid planning application for a wind energy development has already been submitted to
a local planning authority and the development plan does not identify suitable sites, the following
transitional provision applies. In such instances, local planning authorities can find the proposal
acceptable if, following consultation, they are satisfied it has addressed the planning impacts
identified by affected local communities and therefore has their backing.
What tough new planning tests for onshore wind farms mean for applicants and authorities
26 June 2015 by Susie Sell , 2 comments
New planning guidance on deciding onshore wind farm applications sets tougher tests for developers and could lead to a decline in applications, according to experts.
Wind farms: onshore developments face uncertain future after government announced early end to subsidy
The new Conservative government appears to have wasted no time fulfilling its manifesto pledge to “halt the spread of onshore wind farms”. Last week, planning guidance introduced two local authority tests to determine whether to permit wind projects.
Figures from trade body RenewableUK show approval rates for wind farms dropped markedly between 2012/13 and 2013/14 (see infographic), but experts said the changes create an even tougher climate for developers and could lead to a decline in applications.
The guidance says if a council wants to grant permission for a wind project involving one or more turbines, it must be sited in an area “identified as suitable for wind energy in a local or neighbourhood plan”. It also says councils may only give permission if the “planning impacts identified by affected communities have been fully addressed”.
In a written statement, communities secretary Greg Clark said whether a proposal had the backing of a community will be a matter of planning judgement for councils. He added that a “transitional provision” would cover outstanding applications in areas where a development plan has not identified suitable sites. In such cases, proposals can be found acceptable if the second test – that planning impacts are fully addressed – is met.
The guidance came alongside a government announcement that a key subsidy for onshore wind developers would end a year early. The changes reflect a commitment made in the Conservative election manifesto to “end any new public subsidy for onshore wind farms and change the law so that local people have the final say on applications.”
Yana Bosseva, planning adviser at RenewableUK, said it is not aware of any councils that have identified suitable areas for wind development. “That creates a policy vacuum for wind farm applicants who have potentially been working for months on consultation and are now ready to submit their planning application,” she said.
Bosseva also pointed to possible confusion over the interpretation of whether planning impacts have been “fully addressed”. She added: “It’s important to note is that this is guidance and that the National Planning Policy Framework still has positive provisions for renewable energy. So it’s about the relationship between policy and guidance.”
Duncan Field, partner and head of planning at law firm Norton Rose Fulbright, said the guidance creates a “tougher climate” for wind projects, adding that it will likely require more forward planning of sites. “More groundwork will need to be done before you even get to the application stage now,” he said. “We are probably looking at a significantly increased delay in delivering new sites.”
However, Field said there is still “plenty of scope” for future onshore wind farms. “If wind farm developers want more certainty about their development pipeline, they will have to work hard with councils to find appropriate sites to be allocated in the plan before making an application,” he added.
Paul Maile, partner at law firm Eversheds, said applicants would be “incredibly nervous” after the updates. “This is not just because of the uncertainty from the proposed subsidy changes, but also because a degree of objectivity and predictability is removed from decision-making process.”
Maile added that the guidance and subsidy change would “reduce the number of applications coming forward”. He said: “It’s a combination of two uncertainties: first, in the planning system as to whether a consent might be achievable, and second, whether a project will be economically viable. That’s a great deal of risk for any applicant.”
Michael Wilks, who leads on nationally significant infrastructure projects for the Planning Officers Society (POS), said he does not believe that many local plans contain spatially specific strategies allocating sites for wind energy, “in part because it would be so politically contentious that a local authority would avoid that debate and rather assess individual applications as they arrive”.
Philip Ridley, head of planning at both Suffolk Coastal and Waveney District Councils and POS’s natural resources specialist, said the tests set out in Clark’s statement would make it “almost impossible” for consent to be granted. The government has “put so many costly hurdles in place no developer is going to risk the investment to begin to take a scheme forward”, he added.
Earlier this week, energy secretary Amber Rudd told MPs that the Planning Inspectorate would not be able to overturn local decisions on onshore wind projects. However, a Department for Communities and Local Government spokesman confirmed that developers will retain the right to appeal decisions although they will have to take into account the “clear requirement” for local backing.
John Rhodes, director at consultancy Quod, said the statements made by the government would be important material considerations in any onshore wind proposals and “will no doubt weigh heavily with local authorities and the Planning Inspectorate”. He added: “It will be a brave, determined or reckless promoter who now brings forward wind farm proposals onshore in the light of the government’s strongly stated policy.”
END OF ARTICLES.
I trust this will give some insight into the present planning muddle and offer some hope to those in the effected community as opposed to the perceived misrepresentation of the law made by FoDDC Planning Committee, who would seem to have struck a cosy deal to suit Resillience, who are acting for Councillor Maria Edwards’ application, in a manner that would seem to be ultra viries and as such a corruption of the due process, which should not reach cosy deals with applicants with or without public consultation.
The Government manifesto, on which Mrs. Maria Edwards was elected, clearly states that it was essential that the effected community MUST approve the application and by no stretch of the imagine can the 5km. radius be considered to be the local effected community being an area which includes the whole of Chepstow, St. Arvans and part of Tintern in the devolved area of Monmouthshire, lumped in as a part of the National Area of Wales! Nor was the claim that was made to and by the FoDDC planning committee that support of 2 to 1 in favour of the commercialisation a true reflection of the facts pertaining to the effected community within a 1.5km. radius. Nor in fact does it reflect the cosy arrangement reached for Councillor Maria Edwards by the Planning Committee on which she sits, of 5kms., nor even for the equally misleading 3km. radius and as was shown it does not reflect the community of Tidenham even though it is, I believe, the largest Parish in Britain, where the Parish Council of Tidenham representing the Tidenham community unequivocally voted to reject the application.
I trust the Minister will take note of your letter and the many other facts which show this to be an application which provides a clear case to ‘Call In’ the plans and stand by the Government’s manifesto and its various official and well documented statements of policy. Policies for which you are the Government Chief Whip and as a Treasury Officer and a qualified accountant are well aware of the inefficiency and unreliable nature of wind turbines as an alternative source of power – a source we, as a country deeply in debt and facing inevitable cuts and austerity, can no longer afford to subsidise and thereby enrich wealthy land owners and corporate interests!
I would like to once again thank you for your time and such support you have felt able to offer the effected local community to date and look forward to your continued, and hopefully increased support, for the effected community as your constituents both in the matter of ‘Calling In’ and should it be required to ensure justice is seen to be done any subsequent ‘Judicial Review’.
Phone: 01594 – 528 337 – Calls from withheld numbers are blocked & calls are recorded
We believe the information gathered on this site can act to bring the truth, regarding the dishonesty of the claimed benefits of Wind Turbines to the front of people’s minds as they are regularly taxed, in a hidden tax, on their energy bills to fund these politically correct and fundamentally all but useless monstrosities.
We have gathered a great deal of information in our efforts to prevent the industrialisation of Stroat and the banks of the Severn Estuary and across the wider area including the Forest of Dean (FoD), areas of outstanding natural beauty (AoONB)
Please help to spread the truth about the Wind Turbine scam and the fundamental flaws and lies that are presented as ‘fact’ regarding the anthropogenic influence of mankind on Global Warming and Climate Chance.
Arm yourself with facts to defeat the biggest con of the late 20th and early 21st Century, and do please spread the truth and the URL of this site as widely as you can.
Posted by: Greg Lance – Watkins
For more information about Stroat see: http://Stroat-Gloucestershire.com/
For more information about Greg_L-W see: http://GregLanceWatkins.com/