A worrying “No”:
An application to construct 1380 houses at Quarrendon Fields on the edge of Aylesbury has been REFUSED – because of the “undue harm” it would cause to the landscape, the setting of a Scheduled Ancient Monument and regionally important below ground remains. http://ow.ly/d/ykz Whether you agree with it or not you can at least be confident the decision was produced through a fair and rational process since we are told it drew extensively on the methodology of The English Heritage Guidance on Setting.
So why is it worrying? Because it is likely to be one of the last of its kind. As the Secretary of State pointed out, the National Planning Policy Framework wasn’t yet in force so was “afforded little weight.” But as we all know the NPPF will be in force very shortly and will be imposing “a presumption in favour of sustainable development” in all such cases. What price a fair and rational assessment process based on The English Heritage Guidance on Setting then?!
A depressing “Yes”….
At the same time permission was sought to erect an adjoining wind turbine – and was GRANTED. No surprise there, these days. But this remark from the Inspector is depressing: “The wind turbine is unlikely to be visually oppressive or overbearing”. From that you might think it was quite a small turbine, five or ten metres high. But no, it’s massive, 149 metres (485 ft.) from ground to blade tip – that’s taller than St Paul’s and only 9 metres short of Blackpool Tower! You might well wonder, if that is ruled as “unlikely to be visually oppressive or overbearing”, will any wind turbine anywhere in Britain ever be judged visually oppressive or overbearing again?
The Heritage Journal 
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
15/11/2014 at 12:44
...
? Turbines on blackpool tower? WHY
02/08/2015 at 14:01
Ben
What a soppy cock you are. We need wind farms. We’re going to have to look for power elsewhere, but god forbid they put up wind farms. Let’s all have a little cry about it.
Better idea: as oil prices rise, as we continue to fill mines with spent nuclear fuel, you should opt in to paying those prices whilst the rest of us normal people don’t. Maybe there should be a register people like you should sign, saying that you’re okay with paying more for your limited fuel?
Cheerio!
xoxo
02/08/2015 at 14:16
heritageaction
Well Ben, if you weren’t such a shallow thinker you’d have established for yourself what we ACTUALLY think, which is that we’re in favour of windfarms but think that in a few cases they shouldn’t be located where they cause particular damage to heritage sites. So our attitude is moderate and rational and most people agree with our approach whereas you’re a bit silly, and that’s putting it moderately. Cheerio.