Issue - meetings
BOXWORTH: Planning Applications
Meeting: 07/11/2012 - Planning Committee (Item 99)
99 S/1937/12/VC - Boxworth (Site near to Highbarn Cottages, Battlegate Road) 
PDF 37 KB
Additional documents:
- Application file
- 1937-12 - Boxworth site plan, item 99
PDF 23 KB
Decision:
The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.
Minutes:
Alison Burt (applicant’s agent) addressed the meeting.
The Committee approved the application subject to the Conditions set out in the report from the Planning and New Communities Director.
Meeting: 06/04/2005 - Development and Conservation Control Committee (see also Planning Committee) (Item 3)
3 S/1663/04/F - Boxworth and Conington PDF 452 KB
Appendix 1 (Environmental Assessment) and Appendix 2 (Objection Summary) can be viewed on the Council’s website at www.scambs.gov.uk by clicking on the modern.gov logo then Committees > Development and Conservation Control Committee > Browse Meetings > 6th April 2005. Appendix 3 is available only as hard copy.
Additional documents:
- Environmental Assesssment - NTS, final, item 3
PDF 138 KB
- StopCWF Vol 1 ObSumm - Final, item 3
PDF 185 KB
Decision:
Refused, unanimously, for the reasons set out in the report from the Director of Development Services.
Minutes:
The Committee considered a detailed report for a Wind Farm consisting of 16 Wind Turbines, Anemometry Mast, Substation and associated infrastructure on land to the south west of Huntingdon Road (A14 Trunk Road) in the Parishes of Boxworth and Conington for Cambridge Wind Farm Ltd.
The Development Control Quality Manager updated Members on developments since the report had been published. These related, among other things, to further comments about noise, the impact on wildlife and industrial processes involved in extracting electricity from the facility, He reported that Cambridge Airport would require a further 6-8 weeks to respond fully to consultation. Referring to the reasons for refusal set out in the report, he said that numbers 3, 5 and 6 were, in effect, “holding reasons” Were Members to refuse the application, and the Council was obliged to defend that refusal at appeal, any or all of reasons 3, 5 and 6 could well be withdrawn but, at the same time, new reasons could be introduced.
Members made the following points:
|
· |
Cambridgeshire had already made significant progress towards meeting the 2010 target with regard to wind energy |
|
· |
The applicant had an agreement with an adjoining landowner for an additional nine turbines, were the current application to win approval |
|
· |
The proposal could have serious repercussions for improvements to the A14 Trunk road |
|
· |
Consideration should be given to the feelings of local people, other development pressures on the countryside, compliance with planning policies and the adverse impact on the character of the countryside and quality of life |
|
· |
The possible distracting effect for drivers on the A14, and implications for aviation safety |
|
· |
There were significant issues of noise and scale: but while an “industrial” facility such as this was seen as inappropriate on this site, the Council should reaffirm its commitment to renewable energy, where appropriate |
|
· |
The proposal would have an adverse effect on the amenity of local residents, including interference with television signals |
|
· |
There should be a national assessment of suitable sites, with local authorities responsible for individual wind turbines and central government responsible for the siting of larger wind farms |
|
· |
Greater emphasis should be placed on siting wind farms off-shore in order to meet demands for renewable energy |
The Strategic Development Officer referred to the ambitious target, set in a White Paper on energy published by the Government in February 2003, to reduce CO2 emissions by 60% by the year 2050. He acknowledged that, as technology advanced, and economies of scale took effect, the cost of constructing, and importing electricity from, off-shore wind farms would reduce dramatically.
The Development Control Quality Manager reminded Members that, should the Local Planning Authority resolve to refuse the application, its reasons for doing so must be justifiable and material planning considerations. In particular, the question of whether or not this wind farm was needed in order to meet the County’s 2010 and 2020 targets was irrelevant, and the argument for and against off-shore wind farms was one for national, not local, debate. The issue of interference ... view the full minutes text for item 3
Meeting: 02/03/2005 - Development and Conservation Control Committee (see also Planning Committee) (Item 18)
18 S/1299/03/F - Boxworth PDF 96 KB
Decision:
Refused contrary to report on grounds of size of garage and materials.
Minutes:
REFUSED contrary to the recommendation contained in the report from the Director of Development Services. Having visited the site, Members considered that the size of the garage and type of materials used conflicted with policies SE5 and EN5 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2004.