The papers have just been released in advance of next week’s planning meeting.
The IW Council planning officer have recommended refusal of the proposed development of the three wind turbines at Cheverton Down.
The main considerations that the planning officer judged as relevant to the determination of this application were
- Principle of Development
- Landscape and Visual Impact
- Ecology and Nature Conservation
- Highway Impacts
- Noise
- Cultural Heritage and Archaeology
- Economic Impacts
Here’s a brief summary of the reasons given for the refusal …
- Significant visual impact upon the local settlements
- Substantial harm to the landscape character of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and parts of the Heritage Coast
- Not possible to undertake mitigation in terms of landscaping works
- The application presents insufficient information to demonstrate that there are any overriding socio economic benefits provided by the proposal
Comments from those affected
We’ve contact both ThWART and Cornwall Light and Power to get comments form them.
Cornwall Light and Power have responded and we hope to publish their comments shortly.
We hope to hear from ThWART soon.
More details
Full details can be read in the 42 page document.
Looking through the document, there’s been a couple of bit that we’ve found of interest so far – but keen to hear more.
5.61 – There has been a total of approximately 2000 letters of representation received. Of this total approximately 1300 object to the application and approximately 700 support.
it would be great if you, dear reader, would be able to highlight anything in the IWC document that you think relevant and let us all know.
IWC summary of support and objections
The IWC planning department summarised the comments from the people and organisation that commented as follows.
Support:
“¢ The proposal would contribute towards reducing carbon emissions and global warming. These environmental benefits far outweigh any potential harm to wildlife.
“¢ Other areas have experienced an increased number of tourists visiting after wind turbines have been erected.
“¢ The visual impact of the proposal is not necessarily negative. This is down to personal opinion; some people see them as an engineering success to be admired.
“¢ As the turbines are constructed locally on the Island, approving the application would help a local company (Vestas) and hence the local economy.
“¢ The proposal is essential for meeting Renewable Energy Targets.
“¢ The proposal is supported by the principle of sustainable development and would help the Island become less reliant on importing energy from the mainland.
“¢ The structures are only temporary and are a prudent use of natural resources.
“¢ Supported by National Policy and local Eco-island Strategy.
Object:
“¢ Noise from the turbines will be channelled down the valley, a ricochet effect will then occur which magnifies the sound taking it above recommended limits.
“¢ Infrasound will be produced which can cause harm to humans and animals.
“¢ Aviation lighting will make them visible at night.
“¢ TV and telecommunications signals will be disrupted.
“¢ Shadow flicker will occur affecting nearby properties.
“¢ The local road network will become dangerous during the construction with the increase in traffic and use of elongated, wide loads.
“¢ Deforestation will occur along access tracks for large vehicles to pass.
“¢ Fear of precedence – if this application is approved in the AONB then more proposals will follow.
“¢ Bridleways will become dangerous to humans and horses, horses may bolt due to noise, shadow flicker etc.
“¢ The Islands economy will suffer because tourists will be put-off visiting, property prices will tumble.
“¢ The landscape and visual impact of the proposal will be of significant detriment to the AONB.
“¢ Bats and birds will be killed by the turbines (barotraumas being a major cause of this)
“¢ Ice throw, blade failure and lightning strike are all health and safety risks of the proposal.
“¢ The proposal is against National, Regional and Local Planning Policies.
“¢ Archaeological remains will be destroyed.
“¢ Cables for grid connection would involve more disruption and landscape damage.
“¢ Denmark and Netherlands are dismantling their wind farms which proves they are not a viable option.
“¢ The applicants Environmental Statement is mainly desktop based and is therefore inadequate to help accurately determine this application.
“¢ Hydrology and Hydrogeology will become major issues on the site, flooding will result.
