Windmast

The decision, although a disappointment to members of The Pontefract Wind Farm Action Group, was inevitable, considering the high profile pressure being exerted by national government to establish some visible proof of their commitment to Renewable Energy.

The main objective of The Pontefract Windfarm Action Group is to prevent the construction of a Wind Farm in the South Pontefract Area and we will not be detracted from achieving this objective by this minor setback.The Wind Farm developer Banks Developments Ltd, in seeking this decision from the Inspectorate will not be too pleased with the findings of Inspector Philip Major.

Conditions attached to the decision give them a maximum of three years to complete their investigation and return the land to it’s original state and they have to complete a comprehensive recording to protect the archaeology of the area, a potentially expensive exercise. From a planning point of view the report by Philip Major is a document,written by an experienced professional,which presents a qualified view of the landscape and the possible harm that any inappropriate construction could cause.
He states ,for example:- 
 “Particularly when seen from the west,the ridge is an attractive and relatively unspoilt tract of countryside which clearly offers a valuable recreational resource”

"views towards the west are impressive and encompass countryside and villages which are also relatively unspoilt”

“the rolling agricultural land is a valuable resource close to densely populated and industrialised locations”

When assessing impact on Landscape these are very strong words from a qualified inspector and establish without doubt the level of harm a six turbine Wind Farm would cause. Philip Major goes on to say:-

“I am informed that UDP Policy OL20 is supportive of renewable energy proposals where, amongst other things, the effects on the landscape of the area,are acceptable.Though I do not have a full extract of that policy,in view of the fact I have determined the proposal would result in some harm to the landscape,I conclude that there is conflict with the policy.”