Rossendale Council have received a revised planning application for a temporary meteorological mast and equipment to be erected on land to the west of Rooley Moor Road at the Top of Leach. This comes after two previous failed applications. The last time it was considered, the decision was deferred due to issues in the consultation process.

The updated plans can be viewed online here:

Planning Application 2025/0061

You will be required to create an account if you intend to leave a comment.

The deadline for comments has been extended from the 11th to the 17th June 2025.

If you share our concerns as expressed below please lodge your own objection and share with family, friends and colleagues. We have also provided a template letter of objection which you can use as is, or better, customise to suit your own position on the application.

Concerns

We have several concerns about this application, which to construct a wind mast on the highest point of the moor, in order to collect data, over a two year period in support of the Scout Moor 2 wind farm application. It appears that the requirement for the mast is to support the financial case for the proposed wind farm, as well as to supply information to confirm turbine design. However it is surprising that this mast should be required since there are already many years of data available from the operation of the existing wind farm. Cubico have also installed a WindCube® near Top of Leach to collect data, which is the most flexible and accurate wind measurement technology available, for both onshore and offshore projects. It is well-suited for all turbine types and supports continuous measurement campaigns throughout all project phases, providing the necessary information for both turbine design and  bankable data needed to secure funding, while minimizing risk. The reason why the alternative available data is not adequate, has not been explained by the applicant.

Our main objection relates to the construction access via the Cotton Famine Road/Rooley Moor Road and Catley Lane Head conservation area and the fact that the met mast location is on CRoW Act 2000 land. Access to the met mast location will require driving mechanically propelled vehicles on a national trail bridleway, which is on common land and in green belt – this is an illegal activity without the permission of all the commoners who have rights of common on this particular common land unit (CL163). The proposed loading area to tranship materials from road going vehicles to off-road vehicles is on common land and green belt, engineering works will be required to create the loading area and a section 38 application for work on common land should be necessary.

Our other concerns are as follows:

1. Impact on landscape and views – The mast would contribute significantly to the industrialisation of the landscape which is a unique green space for Rossendale and Rochdale. This mast would damage the views and amenity from many important viewpoints, such as Waugh’s Well, Catley Lane Head, the Prickshaw Conservation Area, Cowme Reservoir and the Cotton Famine Road. Note that the site at Top of Leach is the highest point on Rooley Moor Road at 474m and therefore visible from many miles. The fenced off area for the mast will be an ugly eye-sore.
2. Process – Rochdale doesn’t appear to have a planning application out for comment, despite the loading area in the Rochdale Conservation area of Catley Lane Head. This is a failure in process to consult with impacted communities.
3. Timing – If data has to be collected over a 2 year period before the turbine design can be confirmed and bank loans can be considered, then what are the implications for the wind farm application – a) if the data proves unsuitable b) if the application is refused!
4. Safety – The proposed access route is part of the nationally significant trails; the Mary Towneley Loop and The Pennine Bridleway. These trails are widely publicised and attract visitors and revenue from all regions of the UK and beyond. The equestrian community is very worried about the impact on the local riders, with over 500 horses within a 5 mile radius that use the road.
5. Damage to the road – The Method Statement provided by the Applicants makes clear their intention to use a 10 tonne tracked dumper and an 8 tonne tracked excavator. These are not usual agricultural machines for use in this environment (most of the farmers and graziers use quads for their businesses) Access by these machines to the moors should not be allowed. The potential for these machines to cause damage is made clear in the Highways Report from Rochdale Council. At the top of Rooley Moor Road there is clear signage which indicates that the route is subject to both a Section 59 Warning and a PSPO prohibiting inappropriate access. Local residents have been actively supported GMP, in their enforcement activities for nearly a decade. Against this background, Cubico have failed to provide details of any specific legal advice they have received in relation to access. Access should therefore not be granted until clarity on this specific issue is demonstrated to all stakeholders.
6. Alignment with local plans – The Rossendale Local Plan sets out the Vision which envisages that the Borough will be a place where people want to live, visit, work and invest. Rossendale’s distinctive landscapes and natural assets will continue to be protected and enhanced for their intrinsic value to biodiversity and tackling climate change as well as their recreational and economic value to local people and visitors alike. How does this application support this Vision?
7. Impact on environment – The proposed temporary structure would be placed in a Countryside Stewardship Water Quality Priority Area, in a Drinking Water Protected Area, in a Priority Habitat Inventory – Blanket Bog, and in a Climate Change Vulnerability Buffer. Therefore, the mast will necessarily damage the environment, and in the context of an isolated application where are the funds to address the damage? It is quite possible that the application for the wind farm could be rejected leaving us with permanent damage to the moor.

The CRoW Act 2000

The CRoW Act 2000, short for the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, is a piece of legislation passed in the United Kingdom that mainly affects public access to the countryside in England and Wales. It was a major reform in the realm of public rights of access to open land. The CRoW Act aimed to balance the rights of the public to enjoy the countryside with the needs of landowners and conservation efforts. It was part of the Labour government’s broader agenda to expand access to the outdoors and promote healthy recreation.

1. Key features of the CRoW Act 2000

Right to Roam

The Act grants the public a legal right of access to certain types of land for recreational purposes on foot. This includes:

• Mountains
• Moors
• Heaths
• Downs
• Registered common land

These areas are collectively known as “access land”.

Restrictions

Although it provides the right to roam, it also includes:

• Restrictions on activities (e.g., no camping, fires, or vehicles)
• Landowners can temporarily restrict access for land management, safety, or privacy reasons

2. Rights of Way

The Act improves the recording, management, and maintenance of public rights of way (footpaths, bridleways, etc.), with a view to completing a definitive map of all rights of way.

3. Nature Conservation

The Act strengthens the protection of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and provides powers for better conservation and management.

4. AONBs (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty)

It places AONBs on a similar statutory footing to National Parks in terms of protection and management.

 

Template Letter of Objection

Please feel free to use the following template as a basis for your own objection:

I wish to formally object to planning application 2025/0061 by Cubico UK Development (Wind 1) Limited for the erection of a temporary meteorological mast and associated infrastructure. This objection is based on significant concerns regarding the proposed development’s potential impacts on heritage assets, biodiversity, the environment, and public access, evaluated against UK planning law and policy.

My primary concern, strongly supported by representations from the Rooley Moor Neighbourhood Forum and Rossendale Civic Trust, relates to the proposed access route via Rooley Moor Road. This road, also known as the ‘Cotton Famine Road’, is a non-designated heritage asset of national and international importance. It features stone setts laid by hand by mill workers during the Cotton Famine and is a monument to a significant historical period. The proposed use of vehicles, including a Tractor and Trailer, Tracked Dumper, and Tracked Excavator, is likely to cause irreparable damage to the cobbled structure. The planning application acknowledges this risk, proposing photographic surveys and potential remedial works, but this approach does not guarantee the preservation of this unique asset. National planning policy requires that harm to non-designated heritage assets should only be permitted where the benefits outweigh the harm. In this case, the temporary nature of the mast for wind data collection may not sufficiently outweigh the potential permanent damage to this historic road. Furthermore, the access route passes through the Catley Lane Head Conservation Area, potentially affecting its character and appearance, contrary to policy ENV2.

The use of mechanically propelled vehicles on this section of Rooley Moor Road is also contentious as it forms part of the Pennine Bridleway National Trail and is on common land. Driving on a bridleway without lawful authority is a criminal offence, and operations on common land must not be detrimental to the interests of commoners. Questions have been raised by the Rooley Moor Neighbourhood Forum regarding the legality of this access and whether appropriate permissions from landowners, commoners, and relevant Rights of Way Officers have been secured. Planning policy TR2 supports the network of rights of way and states that development should not adversely affect their use or amenity.

The proposal also presents risks to biodiversity and ecological features, which should be conserved and enhanced under the National Planning Policy Framework and Local Plan policies like ENV4. The site and surrounding area comprise degraded blanket bog, a UK Biodiversity Priority Habitat and Priority Habitat Inventory site. While the applicant claims minimal habitat loss, the proposed digging for guy line anchors and the placement of railway sleepers involves disturbance of the peat. Although peat handling measures are proposed, damaging peatland, which forms very slowly and stores significant carbon, risks long-term environmental harm.

The Preliminary Ecological Appraisal identifies the presence of breeding bird territories within 500m of the site, including Skylark and Meadow Pipit, which are ground-nesting species. Skylark are a Birds of Conservation Concern Red List species. Curlew, another BoCC Red List and Priority Species, has also been recorded flying over the site. Construction during the nesting season (March to August inclusive) could cause disturbance. While daily walkovers are recommended, development activity within a priority area for such species remains a significant concern. Concerns regarding potential impacts on bats and other protected species have also been noted in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal.

Furthermore, the application is exempt from mandatory Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) calculations due to the proposed development area being less than 25m². However, given the temporary nature of the mast and its ancillary infrastructure, and the potential for impacts extending beyond the immediate mast location (e.g., access route, guy lines), relying solely on this ‘de minimis’ exemption may not adequately ensure that the proposal contributes to the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity as required by policy.

The use of alternative technologies, such as Lidar, has been raised as a less impactful option for wind monitoring. These remote sensing devices offer advantages like portability, easier deployment, reduced safety hazards, and potentially better data accuracy at various heights without the need for heavy equipment, significant foundations, or tall, visible structures that could impact landscape character and pose risks to birds. The Framework encourages supporting renewable energy infrastructure, but the necessity and appropriateness of a mast, particularly given less impactful alternatives, warrant careful consideration.

The timing of the application, before the main Scout Moor II wind farm application is determined, also raises concerns. If the wind farm is not approved, the temporary mast and associated disruption will have occurred to no avail, potentially leaving behind damage despite restoration efforts.

Finally, concerns about the enforceability of planning conditions, particularly regarding the protection of Rooley Moor Road and breeding birds, have been noted.

For all the reasons outlined above, I believe that the proposed development conflicts with key planning policies aimed at protecting heritage assets, biodiversity, and the environment, as well as ensuring appropriate access and mitigating potential harms. I urge the Planning Committee to take full account of these points.

I therefore object to planning application 2025/0061 and request that planning permission is refused or, at the very least, deferred until these significant concerns are adequately addressed and the viability of less impactful alternatives is fully explored.