Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:29 pm Post subject: Residents vow to fight wind farm
Quote:
Developers have lodged the appeal to build four wind turbines on a Blaenau Gwent mountain, following a decision to unanimously reject the application.
Campaigners say Blaenau Gwent mountain has a history of landslides and they are worried over safety and impact.
But developers Eco2 said it was a "good project" and would generate enough to power for 2,700 homes.
Residents from Blaina and Cwmtillery, south Wales met on Tuesday night to voice their opposition to the proposed wind farm on Mynydd James mountain, which sits above their valley.
They have organised a group to campaign the planning action and earlier this year were successful in seeing the planning application rejected by officials.
The mountain is very unstable and over the years there have been a number of slips
Lesley Wedgbury, Save Coity and Mynydd James
The application, which had been recommended by planning officials, was unanimously rejected by Blaenau Gwent council on eight grounds.
These included the visual impact the turbines would have on the landscape and tourism and noise.
Councillors when they met to reject the plans expressed concern for the stability of the area, which had been extensively mined and was subject to landslips and faults.
They accepted that this instability could lead to "stress" for residents.
The campaign called in Geoff Sinclair, a planning consultant for the Pembrokeshire-based Environment Information Services to help their case.
He said: "It's a legitimate response from the community, it still still a very conspicuous site and is outside the strategic area outlined by the assembly."
Lesley Wedgbury, from the residents' group Save Coity and Mynydd James (SCAM), is concerned about proximity of the farm to residential dwellings.
"My main concern is my safety, I don't want to wake up one morning and find myself buried by a mountain.
'Good project'
"The mountain is very unstable and over the years there have been a number of slips, where houses were demolished," she said.
The group is also concerned the impact the Pendragon farm could have on their community, including property values.
Since the initial planning process began the development has been scaled down from 24 turbines to just four, but developers remain confident the farm could be successful.
David Williams, chief executive of Eco2 said: "We have received encouraging support from the local community, and we strongly believe in the benefits of Pendragon Fach both for the local economy and in the urgent global fight against climate change.
"We believe this is a good project that would make a valuable contribution to the renewable energy targets both locally and nationally.
"It will prove an asset to the locality, providing £2m worth of jobs during the construction period, and a minimum of £500,000 for community trust funds over the wind farm's lifespan."
Back in the news again _________________ My life is no rehearsal There'll be no curtain call encore, so I've thrown my screwed up script away to ad lib my life once more!
Following your article regarding the residents fighting having a 'Wind Farm', I would like to ask the objectors to state their alternatives to this idea. How do they propose to provide fuel if they disagree with this method. If they have better ideas why do they not make these clear!
Have a dig around some of the old threads on this subject, and also on the old Aber message board (link at the top of this page). It's been discussed at length many times.
Which isn't to try and deter anyone from doing so again of course. But alternatives have been discussed and the efficiency of land-based windfarms as a method of power generation have been questionned. _________________ The compliments pass when the quality meet.
That's fair enough I'll have to have a look at those. But it always seems that when anything new is proposed in this are someone objects.
I've got some sympathy with what you say there - there are a lot of 'glass half empty' people around But that doesn't always mean they are wrong of course! _________________ The compliments pass when the quality meet.
I sympathise somewhat with the campaigners - when something is proposed that you think will affect your quality of life you immediately put up barriers. But I also understand the energy problem we have.
It would be interesting to hear the views of residents in an area where a wind farm has been built within similar distances to what is proposed here.
As to the stability issue surely if the land is unstable that's an end to it? or can they fo some 'super' engineering to rectify?
Maybe the developers will do an 'ireland eu referendum' - keep appealing until they get the answer they want!
Not sure what the outcome should be here _________________ Top tip: never put anything in your ear smaller than your elbow
I sympathise somewhat with the campaigners - when something is proposed that you think will affect your quality of life you immediately put up barriers. But I also understand the energy problem we have.
It would be interesting to hear the views of residents in an area where a wind farm has been built within similar distances to what is proposed here.
As to the stability issue surely if the land is unstable that's an end to it? or can they fo some 'super' engineering to rectify?
Maybe the developers will do an 'ireland eu referendum' - keep appealing until they get the answer they want!
Not sure what the outcome should be here
I have yet to hear a sound scientifically based argument against wind turbines, other than that they are not as efficient as we are led to believe. So what, we`re not paying for them. Anyway, new techology is rarely efficient; it progresses with time as it always has done. Quality of life !?!? Perhaps there`s a risk those poor illegals bikers might bump into the giant windmills when going about their business of churning up the countryside. Now there`s a petition for you. The antis also want us to believe that a commercial organisation would risk millions of pounds worth of equipment by building on unstable land. I`ve switched off already
To quote Saeson:
"The antis also want us to believe that a commercial organisation would risk millions of pounds worth of equipment by building on unstable land. I`ve switched off already Confused"
They won't of course.
Which then begs the question 'why on Earth are they applying for PP ?'
I think I need to have a look at who's on the Board of Directors ( a freebie from Companies House, and then compare that to a list of Labour Party members.
You see, it seems strange to me that after a few years, and in the middle of a huge economic downturn, and coincidentally very shortly after a change in administration in Blaenau Gwent, we get a planning application such as this.
Interesting times ahead.................. _________________ Rocke
Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:22 pm Post subject: Developers Eco2 lodge appeal after Blaenau Gwent Council rej
Quote:
DEVELOPERS have lodged an appeal to realise controversial wind farm plans in Blaenau Gwent.
In January this year, developers Eco2 failed in their bid to build four turbines above Blaina on Mynydd James mountain, which many believed to be prone to faults and landslips.
But after councillors unanimously rejected their plans on eight separate counts, the developers are taking their proposal to a public inquiry.
Community group Save Coity and Mynydd James will again be contesting the plans, and are currently attempting to recruit experts to help their case.
After the councillors’ decision, the planning department of Blaenau Gwent Council – who had recommended the plans be approved – said that if the issue went to a public inquiry, the eight reasons to refuse the wind farms might not hold up to scrutiny.
In his report, head of planning Steve Smith told councillors that each reason would need to be defended robustly.
He said: “I would not be fulfilling my professional obligations to the committee if, at this juncture, I did not highlight the fact that some of these reasons will be extremely difficult to defend.”
He added that the committee’s belief that the disadvantages outweighed the benefits was an invalid argument. He said it was not their role to “question the judiciousness of regional or UK government policy.”
Objections to the site, which would create 50 jobs and generate enough electricity for 20,000 homes, include ground stability issues, the impact on the countryside and tourism, and the effect on a nearby farm.
Speaking after the appeal was lodged, David Williams, chief executive of Eco2, said it would provide £2m worth of jobs and at least £500,000 funding for the community.
“We have received encouraging support from the community, and we strongly believe in the benefits of Pendragon Fach for both the economy and in the urgent global fight against climate change,” he said.
“We believe this is a good project that would make a valuable contribution to the renewable energy targets both locally and nationally.”
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
But that doesn't always mean they are wrong of course! 
The antis also want us to believe that a commercial organisation would risk millions of pounds worth of equipment by building on unstable land. I`ve switched off already 