School wind turbines plan refused
CONTROVERSIAL plans to build two wind turbines at a Plymouth school have been rejected, after nearly 12 months of wrangling.
City council planning officers recommended the planning committee grant permission for the 20m high turbines at Coombe Dean School.
But in a vote that divided along party lines, councillors rejected the application.
Cllr Kevin Wigens, Conservative member for Plymstock Dunstone, was loudly applauded when he told the committee the 65ft-high turbines would be incompatible with their surroundings, which were mostly bungalows.
“This will be quite simply unbearable for residents, many of whom are retired,” he said.
The school said the turbines, which would be the first at a city school, would save money and promote green energy among pupils.
Coombe Dean headteacher Pattrick Frean told the meeting, which had been moved to the council chamber to accommodate the public interest, changes had been made to the height and positioning of the turbines to accommodate concerns.
He said the plans were opposed by “a self-interested cabal of voters”, adding: “The choice is to treat the world as ours to do with as we please, as borrowed from our children.”
Residents claimed the turbines will be an eyesore, too noisy and will pose a danger to health from flickering shadows and broken blades.
Cllr Nicky Wildy (Lab, Devonport) accused residents of nimbyism.
Norman Proctor, a neighbour and a turbine engineer, gave evidence to the committee. He said the flickering of the turbines posed a risk to epileptics, saying: “It will only be a matter of time before the court cases start.”
He said the environmental benefits had been overstated. The saving of 4.5 tonnes of carbon a year was equivalent to two people travelling to school by car.
Mr Proctor said: “It would be only a matter of time before somebody tried throwing a handful of stone chippings into the rotating blades.”
Cllr Bill Stevens (Lab, Devonport) accused Conservative members of the committee of opposing the turbines for party political reasons.
But Cllr Linda Bowyer (Con, Eggbuckland) denied Conservatives had been pressured to go against the turbines.
Cllr Mark Lowry (Lab, Honicknowle), said: “This is the first opportunity for this council to show its green credentials.”
Cllr Wendy Foster (Con, Plymstock Radford) said she was concerned about the effect of shadow flicker on pupils at the school.
Cllr Wildy pointed out the officers' report said the impact of flicker was a matter of personal opinion.
11 Comments
View all
by Ian, Plymstock
Monday, August 18 2008, 10:05PM
“The Planning Committee were right to reject this application. I and many other residents have spent hundreds of hours investigating the true facts behind the proposal.
The evidence clearly indicates that these large turbines would be overbearing and totally out of keeping within the quiet residential area. I am appalled that neither the school or those that voted for the application were concerned with the safety of the children or members of the public that attend the school or the local residents. Many serious safety issues exist. Shadow flicker will occur, noise will be an issue and the application does not conform to PPS22 recommendations on safety fall-over distance.
The application did not provide evidence of the financial or carbon saving calculations, which were vastly overstated. Financial break even is highly unlikely - this project would be a waste of tax-payers money. These turbines would make no difference to the carbon footprint - the environmental cost of making, transporting and installing them in such a location outweighs the benefit - the wind speed is too low to produce enough energy to justify installation.
The school does not have to erect two 65 ft turbines to educate students about global warming or alternative energy sources - there are many other ways to achieve this and live in harmony with the local community, of which the school is part.
The following link lists many of the problems that can occur with wind turbine technology - something the manufacturers/suppliers will not tell you. http://www.geocities.com/nigbarnes/#f”
by Adrien Clark, Elburton
Sunday, August 17 2008, 9:15PM
“Well if you want my opinion they should of had the wind turbines plan approved not refused cause they wouldn't provide any shadow flicker effect on the neighbouring community of Coombe Dean School and also it shall not be any bigger, if not smaller, than one of the teaching buildings in the school grounds. If they did get the turbines for the school they would of had more resources to spend on the children's education rather than the school's electricity bill, and then the children shall not so stupid as someone as said in the comments. The noise pollution that the neighbouring community are complaining about shall not exist because the turbines have no gears in them so they shall be silent so it shall not keep you awake during the night.”
by Steve, Plymouth
Friday, July 25 2008, 3:49PM
“Nev, any particular reason why you ask the same question twice?”
by Proffessor Sensible, Plymouth
Friday, July 25 2008, 3:36PM
“This is a sensible decision that prioritised protection of the environment. The deciding factor was the risk of the much publicised 'helicopter effect'.”
by Nev, Whitechapel
Friday, July 25 2008, 3:30PM
“Micky - any particular reason why you are calling the children "stupid" ?”