As scare stories go, it’s not been very, well, scary…for three of the last four issues of pravda, we’ve had some of our local councillors banging on about wind farms being developed that will be sited on top of Ilkley Moor. They present the vision that the Moor will soon be home to a veritable army of white-armed whirling things. The fault, of course, lies with the government, and specifically with Mr Prescott, who has introduced new planning advice that will make it almost impossible for local authorities to stop wind farm developers plonking their machines down anywhere they choose. Anne ‘no paseran’ Hawkesworth and Audrey ‘duhhr…’ Brand have combined to fight this menace.
These two have, of course, united to defeat this threat, which is obviously totally non-political, unconnected to the forthcoming election campaign and the expected declaration of the Tories at national level against windfarm development. No, it’s all about saving our precious moor. And it has to be done quickly, because all responses are due in NOW! (Only they’re not, responses were due in to the draft by the end of January so no paseran has already missed the deadline, and is presumably just using this as an excuse to scare people).
It’s also, of course, complete bollocks. But once again, it demonstrates the lack of acuity shown by the journalists of our local press. At no point have any of them seen fit to search out the relevant planning legislation and check what’s actually being said. So, rest assured that the Ilkley Rocks team have.
The planning legislation in question, Planning Policy Statement 22, is designed to bring up to date advice to planning officers regarding renewable energy and thus does cover windfarms.
The main purpose is to show how
Renewable energy developments should be capable of being accommodated throughout England in locations where the technology is viable and environmental and other impacts can be addressed satisfactorily.
And, yes, clause 2 suggests Regional planning guidance and development plans should contain policies designed to promote and encourage, rather than restrict, the development of renewable energy resources
which is presumably as far as our beloved local councillors read before running off screaming to the Gazette.
But PPS22 still leaves in substantial protections:
Development proposals should demonstrate any environmental, economic and social benefits as well as how any environmental and social impacts have been minimised through careful consideration of location, scale, design and other measures. Some proposals will be subject to a requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). In such circumstances, local authorities and developers should discuss whether consideration of alternative sites is necessary.
…see that? ‘Consideration of alternative sites’? ie. if the proposed site is an SSSI or AONB for instance…
and then there’s…
When located in the green belt, many renewable energy projects will comprise at least some degree of inappropriate development, which may impact on the openness or perceived openness of the green belt. Careful consideration will therefore need to be given to the visual impact of projects, and developers will need to demonstrate very special circumstances that clearly outweigh any harm by reason of inappropriateness and any other harm if projects are to proceed. Such very special circumstances may include the wider environmental benefits associated with increased production of energy from renewable sources.
let’s read that again…’careful consideration will need to be given to the visual impact of projects.’ Hmm, not as straight-forward as our beloved councillors would have it.
And then, of course, the Moor is an SSSI. And what, pray, does the statement have to say about SSSIs?
In sites with national designations (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest, National Nature Reserves, National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and Heritage Coasts) planning permission for renewable energy projects should only be granted where it can be demonstrated that the objectives of designation of the area will not be compromised by the development, and any significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by the environmental, social and economic benefits.
Oh yes, and it’s also an SPA (a Special Protection Area). For these the protection is even stronger..
In sites of international importance for nature conservation (Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation, and RAMSAR Sites) planning permission should only be granted for renewable energy developments once an assessment has shown that the integrity of the site will not be adversely affected. Many renewable energy developments are likely to have some adverse effects on the integrity of such sites. In these circumstances, planning permission should only be granted where there is no alternative solution and there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature
see that? “planning permission should only be granted where there is no alternative solution and there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest”…
ie., not on top of Ilkley Moor.
It’s also clearly stated that PPS22 doesn’t cover energy conservation in buildings, the red herring no paseran raises as preferable to wind farms.
And, of course, the cup and ring rocks have scheduled monument status which prevents development up to 10m around them–it’s going to be a little hard to develop a consistent wind farm up there dodging the rocks!
So what’s going on? Well, obviously there’s the local election coming up, which requires some scare-mongering, and there’s nothing that will scare the locals more (excepting perhaps the notion of a centre for asylum-seekers planted on The Grove) than development of the Moor. It’ll affect house values you know! And Prescott’s an easy target of course.
Behind the story is a rather interesting campaign being led by British Nuclear Fuels, as described in t’Grauniad…. BNF funds countryguardian, the main campaigning group against wind farms, something that’s made obvious by ‘duhhr’s otherwise barking comment that she’d prefer more nuclear facilities.
What, on top of the moor?
Weird…
If no paseran is really so concerned about the visual outlook, I presume she’ll be joining the Menwith Hill forum? After all, there’s a real eyesore.
And then there’s traditional wind farms which presumably no one is against…