Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Bedworld

Developer: We'll fight wind mast refusal

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 28 September 2007
Bosses at Banks Developments have pledged to launch an appeal after stage one of their wind farm scheme on land between Garforth & Mickfield was thrown out by planners. Click here for latest story.
The Durham-based firm has been seeking permission to put up a temporary 60-metre 'monitoring mast' on green belt land at Hook Moor, near Micklefield and Garforth.

But on Thursday councillors unanimously rejected the company's application – despite a report from Leeds's chief planning officer recommending it should, in principle, be accepted.

Rob Williams, divisional projects director at Banks, said the firm was "obviously disappointed" by the decision.

He said an appeal would be launched as soon as the formal reasons for the refusal were made clear.

Mr Williams also said Banks would be pressing ahead with a separate application for permission for the wind farm proper.

The company wants to use data from the monitoring mast to fine-tune its plans for the main scheme, which would involve as many as eight propeller-style turbines.

Each one would reach a height of 125 metres – taller than the clock tower of the Houses of Parliament.

The location earmarked for the wind farm is near the junction of the M1 and A1(M), south of the B1217 Collier Lane.

Council chiefs received 779 letters of objection to the monitoring mast application, compared to just six of support.

Campaigners from the Hook Moor Wind Farm Action Group have already pledged to fight any appeal by Banks.

* Click here for more Hook Moor wind farm stories.

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 28 September 2007 2:32 PM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Leeds
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.