I wouldn't say it was an anti-climax but the odds seemed overwhelming against the "Cranborough" 6-windfarm planning application.
There was opposition from the Airfield, from the Forest Centre, professional planners and of course the Cranfield groundswell mobilised by ACT. The council received 368 letters of objection.
The final vote at Development Management Committee in Central Beds Council this morning (see above) was nine against and one for. There was an abstention hanging around somewhere.
The planning officers stated : "The (proposal) is considered to have a detrimental impact on the landscape character of the area, residential visual and noise amenity and visual amenity from recreational areas within the Vale. The harm would outweigh the benefits of harnessing wind power." The recommended refusal on six grounds including siting and scale; impact on historic environment; lack of information and conflict with national and CBC policies.
The officers specifically criticised FCC for not supplying information needed to assess the application against some of these policies. Given that no rep from FCC turned up to speak in favour the company displayed a cavalier attitude.
There were individual statements to the committee from Cranfield's Cllr Sue Clark, Cllr Alan Bastable, Parish Cllr Roger Baker, chair of the PC planning committee and Peter Gardner of ACT (Against Cranfield Turbines). Cranfield's Cllr Ken Matthews chaired the committee.
2 comments:
Seriously? The Forest Centre objected? Is that the Forest Centre with its own wind turbine? The one that sticks up right in the middle?
My thoughts exactly Dick Peake! Perhaps it would affect their profits?
Post a Comment