Height issue: Wind turbines are taller than the agreed planning permission • Pic: M Hillen

A RETROSPECTIVE planning application for two wind turbines, which were built higher than they should have been, has been turned down.

Permission was granted in April 2012 for two turbines measuring at 23 metres to hub and 34.9 metres to blade tip.

However, the turbines, located in Lammas Farm near Wolfscastle, Haverfordwest, have been built at 29 metres to hub and 39.7 metres to blade tip.

The application for the turbines came before the Planning and Rights of Way Committee on Tuesday, January 19 with a recommendation of approval.

Some councillors felt that the increase in size would not be a problem and one councillor said they were hamstrung by the fact that permission was already in place.

There were also concerns that the turbines were located just 120 metres from a bridleway when the British Horse Society recommends a safe distance of 200 metres.

Wolfscastle Community Council also objected to the application as they felt the turbines should have been built to the height that was originally granted.

Cllr Brian Hall moved the recommendation for approval saying: “It’s already got consent and what would concern me is that if we refuse this today this will go to appeal and the inspector will approve it on the basis it’s been approved before.”

The recommendation was then seconded by Cllr Ken Rowlands.

Cllr Jacob Williams asked how the council had become aware that the turbines had been built taller than they should have been.

The council’s case officer replied: “Consent was granted in April 2012 and there was some email correspondence from January 2013 where it had come to light that the turbines erected on the site appeared to be bigger than when they were approved. The delay has been caused by a lot of correspondence and they told us that they had erected the turbines in error.”

It was also suggested that, if approved, the application should be delegated to the Head of Planning to await a response from the Civil Aviation Authority who were listed as a consultee in the report.

Cllr Keith Lewis said: “I feel quite uncomfortable as there is some resemblance to the application we have just dealt with a house that was higher than the permission granted.

“If a turbine is bigger, the potential impact is always going to be greater and these turbines are five metres higher than what was granted so that does cause me some concern.

“I do think that simply because it was passed then that it necessarily follows that a higher turbine shouldn’t fall awry of that.”

Cllr Rod Bowen added: “The British Horse Society recommends a safe distance of 200m and the fact that nothing has happened is not good enough. It is important for us to take into consideration that the bridleway should be moved 80m to accommodate this particular problem.”

Cllr Tony Brinsden said: “I am totally opposed to this. I have a feeling that this is an attempt to pull the wool over our eyes.

“Built in error! I can’t believe that for one second. It’s not like putting up a Wendy house, this is a massive turbine erection and to say it is built in error is a load of codswallop.”

Cllr Gwilym Price said he was also concerned and added that nobody would make the mistake of a few metres.

Cllr Myles Pepper said: “I don’t agree with the impact being moderate, to me this is a high impact but I think we are hamstrung by the fact that permission is in place.”

Cllr Peter Stock said he also felt uneasy and added that developers should abide by the application they put in.

After a lengthy debate, the recommendation for approval was lost by six votes to seven.

A motion for refusal, on the basis of visual impact, was then put forward by Cllr Peter Morgan and that was supported by seven votes to six.