SPONSORS OF TYNE & TEES FEATURE
VISUAL RESIDENTIAL AMENITY SEEING THROUGH THE ISSUES
The Coalition Government’s Localism Agenda is filtering down to local communities who feel empowered to comment upon proposed local development. Some members of the public have strong views concerning wind energy development and object to applications, seeking to influence both the relevant Case Officer and also members of the planning committee.
SOUTH SHARPLEY
An increasingly common issue is visual amenity associated with residential properties and local panning authorities are refusing projects on these grounds. one such example is at South Sharpley where Durham County Council issued a refusal notice concerning three turbines. The refusal notice alleged that the proposed development would have a significant adverse visual impact on specific residential properties. the applicant (REG Windpower) appealed against this decision through written representation.
NO CLEAR GUIDELINES
Commercial wind farm development will inevitably cause some local visual effects for nearby residential properties. Despite much ill-informed rumour, there are no clear guidelines about the minimum distance from a property within which a wind turbine may have an overbearing affect.
A review of appeal decisions does assist in providing some useful benchmarking concerning the distance within which a turbine will be seen as being overbearing. The matter can be forensically analysed by undertaking a residential amenity assessment which specifically examines particular properties and their relationship with a development proposal. A number of key militating factors need to be considered when assessing whether a turbine will have an overbearing impact on any given residential property.
No particular individual has a right to a view, but there comes a point by reason of proximity and size of a turbine where a residential property would be rendered so unattractive, as a place in which to live that planning permission should be justifiably refused. The key test is whether viewed objectively, in the public interest, would a property become an unattractive place in which to live.
CARLAND CROSS AND BURNT HOUSE FARM INQUIRIES
This test was applied at the Carland Cross and Burnt House Farm Inquiries. Clearly, there needs to be a degree of harm over and above an identified substantial adverse effect on a private interest to take the case into the category of refusal in the public interest.
RESIDENTIAL VISUAL AMENITY STUDY (RVAS)
A detailed RVAS was prepared for the South Sharpley appeal to examine to what extent local properties would be affected. The appeal decision for South Sharpley was issued in April 2011. In allowing the appeal, the Inspector was satisfied that the proposed development would not unacceptably harm the living conditions of nearby residents. This demonstrates that whilst there can be substantial opposition from local communities, careful examination of the facts can clearly demonstrate that there would be no unacceptable harm upon residential visual amenity.
Andy Cook/Paul Burrell Pegasus Group
www.pegasuspg.co.uk Click to view more info
56
www.windenergynetwork.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116