Two large turbines have been constructed at West Thornber in Craven.
One in the right place and one in the wrong place.
When local people informed Craven District Council, the local planning authority (LPA) about the wrong location of the second turbine, the LPA issued an enforcement notice to the land owner.
This requires the 'naughty' or incorrectly sited turbine to be removed.
The land owner has appealed against this enforcement notice and that appeal is currently in the system at the Planning Inspectorate and is, as yet, undecided.
A 45 metre wind turbine, which is 147 feet in old money, is not a small structure. It requires engineering and structural precision and expertise to ensure that these large concrete structures are safe, especially in windy conditions. With all the technical measuring involved, how on earth could a mistake like this be made? Does the fact that those constructing the turbine failed to follow the planning granted make one question if everything else about this incorrectly sited turbine is safe?
Whilst the decision to uphold or dismiss the enforcement action is underway, the land owners have submitted a new planning application asking for retrospective approval of the incorrectly sited 145metre wind turbine. In other words, we put it in the wrong place by accident but grant us approval after the event to make it right.
If the retrospective application is approved then it is entirely possible for the land owners to build a third large wind turbine on the correct site - this is one of the annoying things about planning. Just because they have built something in the wrong place doesn’t mean that the planning permission in the right place ceases to exist!
The application for retrospective planning permission if approved by the officer would permit and encourage further abuse of the planning system. Effectively it would reward the incorrect siting of a turbine which would then enable the creation of a third!
The enforcement appeal regarding the incorrect siting and construction of the second turbine at West Thornber has not yet been decided and therefore, what happens if the planning inspectorate dismisses the appeal? A dismissal means that the 'naughty' turbine would have to be removed.
Yet at the same time, there is an application to grant retrospective planning permission for this incorrectly sited wind turbine.
Is this a case of twin tracking again and more damned if you do and damned if you don’t?
We saw recently, a large scale campaign to prevent a wind farm at Brightenber, Gargrave.
This was, after seven years, prevented following numerous applications and appeals.
The application for retrospective planning permission is listed as officer approval yet such an issue should be presented to the planning committee for member approval as the Parish Council and local people have made their views known
The site has the potential to impact on the setting of the Forest of Bowland AONB.
CPRE whilst objecting to the appeal regarding the enforcement notice and the application 36/2014/14934, were not notified about the retrospective application for planning permission.
Appeal: APP/C2708/C/16/3148384 not yet decided
Application 36/2014/14934 45m turbine, cabling, concrete base, associated cabling and
access approved however, the wind turbine was built on a site not approved in the application
Application 36/2011/12044 application approved.
http://www.cravenherald.co.uk/news/14477641.Farmers_appeal_over_unauthorised_wind_turbine_at_Wigglesworth/
http://www.cravendc.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=10310&p=0
