A wind turbine application dubbed the ‘Hatherleigh Monster’ by people living in the area has been rejected on appeal.
In March 2014 Cornish developer Mi-Grid announced plans for a 77-metre turbine at Heane Farm near Hatherleigh.
The project garnered controversy for its size and a team of residents campaigned against the turbine’s construction, dubbing it the ‘Hatherleigh Monster’.
If it had been built, the turbine would have stood as tall as a 25-storey building when measured to the blade tip.
Last July, West Devon borough planners unanimously refused the proposal on the grounds that it would have a detrimental effect on the wider landscape and character of the area and that there had been ‘insufficient evidence’ provided to satisfy the planning authority that there would not be substantial harm to the setting of the Grade I listed Hatherleigh church.
The applicants appealed the decision in February and the planning inspectorate dismissed the decision on October 20.
Inspector Paul Griffiths agreed that the main issues with the application were ‘the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the surrounding landscape, the setting and thereby the significance of designated heritage assets and the living conditions of local residents through, in the main, visual impact’.
Penny Mills from countryside cam-paigners Campaign for the Protection of Rural England Devon branch expressed her relief at the decision.
She said: ‘This decision is great news and a great relief for the local community who have been campaigning against it for such a long time. It really was a monstrous proposal which would have loomed over beautiful Hatherleigh, over people living close by and the surrounding countryside.
‘There was overwhelming local opposition to the wind turbine. The impact would have been unacceptable and we are so glad that the inspector agrees.
‘In fact since the Ministerial Statement on June 18 referring to the reduction in subsidies for on shore wind turbines, all the local appeals here have been dismissed.
‘The inspector appears to have clearly interpreted the statement in this case too in reaching his decision.’
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User contributions