September 7, 2012

Trispen wind turbine battle not yet over say developers

West Briton | 6 September 2012

Villagers’ triumph over an energy company trying to build turbines on their doorstep may be short lived as a decision is taken to the High Court.

Campaigners branded a four-year battle to stop the construction of a wind farm to the north of Truro a “victory for localism”.

Plans for five 120m turbines at Truthan Barton, near Trispen, have been dismissed after applicant Coronation Power made another bid for permission.

Campaign group 2Big2Close was formed to fight the application. Advocate Martin Pearse, of Follett Stock solicitors, said: “In the end the inspector accepted our arguments and they must go away for good this time.

“This is a victory for local people and localism.”

2Big2Close representative Paul Bateman added: “The emphatic nature of the inspector’s decision to refuse the appeal was very much welcomed and celebrated by the community. The clarity of the inspector’s conclusion should put a stop to any more attempts by the developers to construct wind turbines at Truthan Barton.”

But company boss Vickram Mirchandani has vowed to challenge the decision in the High Court, adding: “We hope it will be second time lucky.”

The original application to build seven turbines on the land was turned down by Cornwall Council, a decision which was supported by the planning inspector on appeal and at the High Court.

But the energy company hoped the inspector’s comments about the possibility of building five of the seven turbines on the land meant a second application would go in their favour.

The company appealed against Cornwall Council’s decision to refuse the second planning application, but still has not been allowed to build the machines.

Inspector George Baird, appointed to rule on the issue, found the turbines would cause “substantial and unacceptable harm” to the setting of the listed Truthan House and the landscape settings of Trispen and St Erme.

Mr Mirchandani said: “We don’t agree with the decision and are going to challenge it in the High Court.

“We feel the first inspector invited us to make the second application, which is why we made it.

“For the second inspector to refuse it without giving any justification for not agreeing with the first inspector, that’s unacceptable.

“We still want to put turbines there.”

URL to article: