[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Peak District planners turn down three wind turbine applications 

Credit:  Liz Roberts, Reporter | grough | Monday 16 September 2013 | www.grough.co.uk ~~

National park planners have turned down three separate applications to build single wind turbines in the area.

Plans for a 25m-high turbine at Newhaven in the Peak District were refused because of the significant impact it would have on the cultural heritage landscape setting of the Arbor Low henge and ancient burial mounds close by.

The site is a scheduled ancient monument. The Peak District National Park Authority said there was also insufficient evidence on whether or not the wind turbine would harm threatened bird species, particularly lapwings.

A proposed wind turbine at Butterton Moor, 18½m from its base to blade tip, was refused because of the size and scale of the development which would have significant visual impact on the surrounding landscape.

The application for a wind turbine at Onecote, 17¾mto the blade tip, was refused on ecological grounds because the applicant had not provided a protected species survey for bats.

The authority said it supports the need for renewable energy but has to balance this with the harmful impact that installing a wind turbine could have on the national park’s natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage.

Although it considers every application for a wind turbine on its own merits, planning committee members decided that none of these proposals were acceptable, it said.

Councillor Lesley Roberts, chair of the authority’s planning committee said: “We support the need for renewable energy but our primary purpose is to protect the national park landscape from harm.

“In these three cases we have had reason to refuse the development on grounds of either landscape or wildlife concerns or a combination of both.”

Source:  Liz Roberts, Reporter | grough | Monday 16 September 2013 | www.grough.co.uk

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)


e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

News Watch Home

Get the Facts
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky