Plans to build wind turbines near Valero Refinery have been turned down for the third time, following a public inquiry late last year.
Rhoscrowther Windfarm Ltd (RWL) applied to construct five 100 metre high turbines on land owned by former Hundleton county councillor John Allen-Mirehouse.
Planning inspector Kay Sheffield concluded that the development would have “a significant and adverse visual effect on the character and appearance of the landscape of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park.”
Her recommendation for refusal has been accepted by Welsh Ministers, who have final say on developments of national significance.
The Chairman of the Pembrokeshire Branch of the Campaign for Protection of Rural Wales (CPRW), Mary Sinclair, was pleased to hear the outcome of the inquiry.
In Particular, Mrs Sinclair had been concerned for the setting of the nearby St Decumanus church and the national park.
She said: “The CPRW is delighted that the tranquillity and spirituality of St Decumanus church has been spared from visual dominance by wind turbine blades.”
“The Inspector also accepted local people’s concerns that where turbine blades would be in line with the refinery its night time illumination would create flickering effects and thus extend the proposal’s impact to 24 hours per day.
“CPRW is pleased to see that the decision reflects the importance of the Angle Peninsula and the Haven as high-quality landscapes – which will now continue to be an outstanding asset for residents and a location of choice for visitors.”
RWL was first refused permission by Pembrokeshire County Council in January 2015 and subsequently appealed in February 2016, which was also dismissed.
The initial appeal decision was quashed by the High Court and a second appeal process began in December 2017.
During the second appeal, the developer said it was willing to accept a condition which would see turbine four not built.
In recommending to Welsh Ministers refusal of the appeal, Ms Sheffield said: “On balance I consider that the harm which would be caused by the development clearly outweighs the benefits it would bring.
“Whilst I acknowledge that the omission of turbine four would reduce the level of harm, I do not consider it would be sufficient to outweigh the harm identified.”
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding