Monday, 31 August 2015

Planning bosses told to reject South Lakes turbine bid

PLANS for a wind turbine close to a candle factory were set to be knocked back.

South Lakeland District Council’s planning committee was today set to hear plans for a 61m turbine at land adjacent to Wax Lyrical in Lindal.

The plans have been submitted by Chris Rawlinson, with the 500kw turbine proposed to help power the candle factory.

However 16 objections have been raised against the plans and the committee was being recommended to reject the plans.

In a report prepared for the meeting, the planning officer concludes that the structure would have a negative impact on the area.

They said: “Although it is recognised that the wind turbine will have wider environmental, economic and energy benefits, it is considered that in this case the harmful visual impact of the proposed turbine outweighs the potential benefits and the application is recommended for refusal.”

In a statement prepared for the committee, Mr Rawlinson said the turbine would provide almost enough power to run the factory.

He said: “The proposal has been driven by the high energy demand of the candle manufacturing plant for which the turbine would supply electrical power. It would provide power directly to the factory with a grid connection for occasions when the output exceeds the demand for electricity, such as times between larger orders when production may be down. The anticipated annual output of a turbine of this size and wind resource is a very close match to the annual average electricity power use of the factory.”

Residents raised several fears about the development in the letters of objection, including the visual impact, the effect it would have on wildlife and the impact of shadow flicker and noise.

Urswick, Pennington and Lindal and Marton Parish Councils were consulted on the plans and all issued objections.

A statement issued by Lindal and Marton Parish Council said: “It was proposed and seconded that the parish council decline to support the application because it would be unacceptably obtrusive because of its size in this area of open countryside. There were three votes in favour with one against and the proposal was carried.”

A final decision was to be made by members of the committee, which was due to meet at the District Council Chamber, South Lakeland House in Kendal at 10am today.

Have your say

In 1987 I bought a house valued by an 'estate agent' at £18,000.
This valuation has no basis on anything other than this estate agents guess that he or she could get for the property in the then 'current marketplace'.

If I had £18,000 in the bank this would have been an 'affordable home' would it not?
As it happened I didn't have £18,000 in the bank so it wasn't 'affordable'.

To go ahead and buy it I had to borrow money as a loan secured not on the property but on the 'estimated valuation' aka a guess made by someone else calling themselves a valuer which resulted in my good self being shackled to a mortgage for 25 years.
Back then everyone was doing it, signing up to loans they couldn't afford I mean.

So in the total absence of any kind of sanity the bank/building society/loan company will in effect buy a home for someone as long as four people make the correct guesses.

1. The estate agent guesses a value people are willing to pay.
2. A valuer guesses a value that the loan company people hope will cover their 'loan' (it isn't really a loan but I'll leave that for another day) should repossession be required.
3. The loan arranger guesses that the person applying will be able to make the repayments plus interest over the term of the loan.
4. The person doing the buying guesses that they will always be able to afford the repayments for the period of the loan.

So what is an affordable home?
One you can afford to buy from your own means without getting yourself in hock to a loan company.

Homes the majority in this land can afford are as rare as hens teeth. So much so that I would venture to suggest that for the majority of the population there is no such thing as an affordable home.

If anyone else has a different take on this then let's hear it.

Posted by Tony on 3 December 2012 at 07:28

Note to moderator...
Consider this humble commenter suitably astonished.

Posted by Tony on 3 December 2012 at 07:04

View all 6 comments on this article

Make your comment

Your name

Your Email

Your Town/City

Your comment


Hot jobs

New vacancies


BBC News business headlines