Report by the sub-committee in respect of the proposed wind turbine

Report by the sub-committee in respect of the proposed wind turbine

  1. To date, one meeting held – 10 members of public attended.

2.  BM and the associated companies involved have been identified. [BM/E4All/Energy    Prospects/Farmwind/Engena]

3.  Farmwind have confirmed that during the initial operating period of 5- years, the majority of operation and maintenance will be undertaken by the turbine manufacturer.  Energy4All manage several wind farm schemes around the country on behalf of co-operatives, and in this case would take over operations at the end of the manufacturer’s warranty as they have done on other sites.

4.  Proximity and noise: A visit to Scottow provided information from a windfarm developer “Air Volution” who held a public consultation there    and routinely operate a “housing buffer” of 630m and in fact at the proposed Scottow site there was no house within 700m – and then only 2. The Renewable Energy Foundation (REF) recommended that the housing buffer zone should be at least 1 km.

5.  The case of 2 turbines at Weston Longville and the planning decision – passed on appeal – has been discussed, as it is very recent (Jan 2012) and the applicant was also BM.

6.  Broadland District Council (BDC):  We understand that BDC have not required BM to submit an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) with their application. We are seeking clarification of this – or alternatively a Heritage Impact Assessment – as identified by the National Trust.

7.  Other Parish Councils also included in the BM plans have been identified and initial contact has been made.

8.  The National Trust has been contacted. They have made a number of points to be addressed at a meeting of all the parties involved.

9.  The Regional Chair of The Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) has made contact. He has been involved in this sort of proposal before and offered to speak at the village meeting.

10.  Blimp: Hempnall PC (South Norfolk) have recently been involved in a similar proposal and are willing to lend us their ‘blimp’. A blimp is a small barrage balloon that can be tethered at the site and ‘flown’ for a short time, to give residents a chance to see how high and how visible the turbine would be. The economics of this have been discussed. At the very least it would cost £150 for public liability insurance. A licence has to be acquired from the CAA but this is apparently straightforward. The Sub Committee believes we should approach BM and ask them to pay for the costs of a blimp as part of the public consultation.

11. Village Meeting – Potential dates have been identified as either 15th or 16th August – if all critical attendees can make this date. The arrangements are ongoing.

12. Notice of meeting – The aim is to mailshot all households in the village and the leaflet inviting the parishioners to the meeting will include a returnable section for the written expression of opinions, to capture the views of those unable to attend – positive and negative – to express themselves publicly.

13. The minutes of the Sub Committee meeting have included contact details of all the various parties in order that parishioners can make contact independently if required.

Paul Killingback

Chair of Sub Committee

29 July 2012

This entry was posted in Wind Turbine. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Report by the sub-committee in respect of the proposed wind turbine

  1. Hi, Neat post. There is a problem with your website
    in web explorer, could test this? IE still is the
    market leader and a big part of other folks will omit your great writing due to this
    problem.

    • oultonpc says:

      Thank you for your comments about the site in Explorer. I am currently away in Australia but will investigate this on my return.
      Richard Bryan

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *