Wind turbine plans cause controversy among locals

PLANS to erect a wind turbine on Richmondshire farmland have caused controversy among neighbouring residents.

But the applicant said it is a step towards cutting the carbon footprint of a successful farm shop and visitor attraction.

Mainsgill Farm, near East Layton, has submitted plans to Richmondshire District Council for a 50 metre wind turbine to help ease increasing rising electricity costs.

Farmer Andrew Henshaw said the decision was not taken lightly and has been making efforts to speak to local residents, many of whom frequently use the farm shop and cafe.

But neighbouring villager Rob Simpson said it would be a blot on the landscape.

He said: “Our main concerns are the blot on the landscape, threat to birds and bats and the impact on visitors passing through the area, and we are quite proud of the fact that we don’t have any.

“We understand Mainsgill Farm is a business but we think it’s a selfish act.”

Mr Henshaw said he had looked at various options to cut fuel costs but only the turbine would be appropriate for the farm.

“The turbine will be sympathetically located so it is in a dip in the footprint of the farm.

“Fossil fuels are not going to last forever so we need to look at ways of keeping our costs down – that way we can keep costs down on our products for our customers.”

He added: “We have approached local people and 90 per cent of comments have been very supportive but I would welcome both positive and negative feedback.”

Mr Simpson said he has been speaking to residents of East Leyton and Ravensworth, who together have written an objection letter to Richmondshire District Council planning officers.

Mr Henshaw said: “We want people to understand it is not a large turbine – I know there’s one going up near Darlington capable of producing 500 kilowatts of power and ours will generate a fraction of that.

“It will make a real difference to Mainsgill – I can understand people’s concerns but we are trying to lower our footprint and keep prices low for our customers.”

Richmondshire District Council planners said the application is in the consultation stage but Mainsgill Farm now has to convince the Highways Agency that the entrance to the farm from the A66 is safe for construction vehicles to enter before it can go before the planning committee.

Comments (6)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:51am Sat 16 Feb 13

TURBINEBAN says...

50 Metres is a LARGE TURBINE -over 164 Feet Tall.
This is the Yorkshire Dales and it should be STOPPED.
A LARGE BLOT ON THE LANDSCAPE & APPLICANTS LOOKING TO MAKE Lots of MONEY OUT OF WHAT IS A COMMERCIAL TURBINE not a small 50 foot farm turbine.
FARM TURBINES ARE NOW BEING APPLIED FOR UP TO 100 metres tall
IT IS SCANDALOUS THAT LANDSCAPES ARE BEING WRECKED FOR
FINANCIAL GAIN. LOCALS & VISITORS MUST OBJECT..
INSTALL SOLAR INSTEAD ......
50 Metres is a LARGE TURBINE -over 164 Feet Tall. This is the Yorkshire Dales and it should be STOPPED. A LARGE BLOT ON THE LANDSCAPE & APPLICANTS LOOKING TO MAKE Lots of MONEY OUT OF WHAT IS A COMMERCIAL TURBINE not a small 50 foot farm turbine. FARM TURBINES ARE NOW BEING APPLIED FOR UP TO 100 metres tall IT IS SCANDALOUS THAT LANDSCAPES ARE BEING WRECKED FOR FINANCIAL GAIN. LOCALS & VISITORS MUST OBJECT.. INSTALL SOLAR INSTEAD ...... TURBINEBAN

11:20am Sat 16 Feb 13

agnostic says...

@turbineban:

East Layton is not in the Yorkshire Dales, and writing IN CAPITALS doesn't make your point any more coherent.

Your comment about financial gain is debatable - this is about developing sustainability, at a rather high financial cost. Oil and gas are finite and filthy, and nuclear energy is dangerous (ask the people of Cumbria why they don't want to live in a nuclear waste dump).

An effective sustainable-energy strategy needs a broad portfolio of energy sources: turbines for when it's windy, solar for when it's sunny, hydro for when it's rainy, and tidal power in the background, all linked together in a super-grid.

I do agree with your recommendation to install solar. For anyone with a suitable roof or garden, it's a no-brainer.
@turbineban: East Layton is not in the Yorkshire Dales, and writing IN CAPITALS doesn't make your point any more coherent. Your comment about financial gain is debatable - this is about developing sustainability, at a rather high financial cost. Oil and gas are finite and filthy, and nuclear energy is dangerous (ask the people of Cumbria why they don't want to live in a nuclear waste dump). An effective sustainable-energy strategy needs a broad portfolio of energy sources: turbines for when it's windy, solar for when it's sunny, hydro for when it's rainy, and tidal power in the background, all linked together in a super-grid. I do agree with your recommendation to install solar. For anyone with a suitable roof or garden, it's a no-brainer. agnostic

3:54pm Sat 16 Feb 13

TURBINEBAN says...

A turbine of this height will make a farmer over a million pounds over 20 years and its index -linked.

I agree with tidal as well -but there are too many turbines now and very few are being stopped.Where they have been stopped it is the local community carrying out a sustained campaign to safeguard their landscape -which of course you don't mention..
Its the whole reason people visit the area..
A turbine of this height will make a farmer over a million pounds over 20 years and its index -linked. I agree with tidal as well -but there are too many turbines now and very few are being stopped.Where they have been stopped it is the local community carrying out a sustained campaign to safeguard their landscape -which of course you don't mention.. Its the whole reason people visit the area.. TURBINEBAN

6:27pm Sat 16 Feb 13

oliviaden6 says...

LETS BAN THESE INFERNAL THINGS SO COMMUNITIES CAN LIVE IN PEACE AND QUIET???????????????
??
LETS BAN THESE INFERNAL THINGS SO COMMUNITIES CAN LIVE IN PEACE AND QUIET??????????????? ?? oliviaden6

9:59pm Sat 16 Feb 13

behonest says...

Yes, this is a selfish, money-making scheme from this farmer. They are an awful blot on the landscape and should be banned.
Yes, this is a selfish, money-making scheme from this farmer. They are an awful blot on the landscape and should be banned. behonest

9:46am Sun 17 Feb 13

spragger says...

I thought these things had been discredited?
Who is getting a bung, or a backhander to stick up these useless, unreliable, bird killing eyesores?
- Oh yet another greedy landowner/ farmer
#KilltheCAP
I thought these things had been discredited? Who is getting a bung, or a backhander to stick up these useless, unreliable, bird killing eyesores? - Oh yet another greedy landowner/ farmer #KilltheCAP spragger

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree