Clifton turbines application early next year?
“An application of this size and relevance has to be well publicised so local people can have a full say”
I wrote a while ago about the installation of a 250ft wind speed testing mast in the Thorpe, Clifton, Harlaston area.
It was a precursor to a potential full planning application for four 420ft commercial wind turbines. That full application, I now understand, is likely to be lodged early in the New Year. The original test mast application was controversial for two reasons.
Applications of this scale must be well publicised
Firstly because the application site is owned by a local farmer who is a Lib Dem district councillor for the area and secondly because locals felt that the Planning Authority at Lichfield hadn’t consulted as widely as they might have done about the proposals.
In fact they had done no more and no less than they were required to do by planning law. In my view that wasn’t good enough for a proposal at the start of a process which could eventually result in such a visual impact on the local countryside and in particular so close to the historic and beautiful church of St Andrews at Clifton Campville.
It’s local councils, in this case Lichfield District, that make the decisions on planning applications like this and so I have nothing directly to do with that process. And whilst I have fundamental doubts as to the benefits of small on-shore wind farms with their whole of life eco ’footprint’ and financial viability without public subsidy my view on this will be formed principally by local public opinion.
Central Government seem determined to see wind farm applications approved and many local refusals have been overturned by Government Inspectors at appeal. Staffordshire County also doesn’t currently have a sub regional policy on wind turbines which weakens the local council’s option for refusal still further.
The previous Labour County Administration never developed one and although, since the election, we are now starting consultation on a sub regional policy time is not on our side with this particular application.
So, it makes it all the more important that local people are clear about the planning proposals when they come and that they submit views, one way or the other, to the public consultation. I suspect that, again, Lichfield’s publicity on this matter may be limited and so I’m going to make sure that I publicise this widely in the Mease and Tame area.
I’ll start that here with an email alert registration for anyone who wants to be kept up to date on the wind turbine proposals. It’s worked really well for the aggregate extraction plans in our area and over 600 people registered with me for quarry news and information.
So, if you’d like email alerts on these proposals please click HERE simply inserting ’Wind Turbines’ in the message body.
Click here to comment on this post
40 comments
Matthew, firstly well done on highlighting this issue when the district council seem to have little interest or understanding that this affects real people.
Windfarms are fine at sea other than the issue of too much wind and massive loss in potential capacity. But in principle the scale and environment make them somewhat more viable.
The area you are talking about and the tiny scale mean that this is just lip service. Local people will end up putting up with an eyesore on the countryside and those closest suffer the constant werring of the turbines with little or no actual benefit environmentally in the long term.
Good luck to you and your constituents on this.
We have had exactly the same problem in our area, that the wind mast went up with hardly any information or fanfare and we are left trying to inform the local community as to what is going to be coming to the area shortly, if opposition to the plans are not made known.
Why does it feel that the local people in all these decisions, are left to feel like mushrooms, ie. kept in the dark and fed “rubbish”?
There should be far more open-ness and information given in the first instance and a high degree of research done into the correct location for this form of alternative energy.
I don’t think any of us are against alternative “green” energy and saving the planet from disintegration if it is the right thing in the right place.
A lot more discussion needs to take place before the countryside is turned over into one huge wind farm from North to South, East to West on a knee jerk reaction to a government under pressure from the EU to tow the European law.
If we do have to tow the line, why do we not have the same 2km distance between wind farms and habitation as Scotland and the rest of Europe?
Mr Ellis,
Most people (who even know about this) are against the plans. There are places where this sort of project would be right and there are places that it would be wrong, regardless of whether the technology really works to our benefit. The Mease Valley is certainly the latter!!!
This is bad news for us. These things cause a constant background noise, are an eyesore and are also inefficient.
We must stop this from happening!!
It’s about our Planet not anything else. I’m all in favour of anything that will reduce the global warming. I’d welcome these technilogies where we live and I suggest people stop bothering about their view and start bothering about saving the planet!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks to Matthew – and his “leaflet-ers” for bringing this to our attention.
He is right that we have not been consulted about this, at all.
And why should we not have a 2km distance between the turbines and houses – as in Scotland and the rest of Europe (as quoted by another respondent)?
Green energy is to be encouraged, obviously, but I share Matthew’s doubts about the REAL “whole of life” eco-credentials of land-based wind turbines – especially in an inland area as flat as this one!
We need to fight this – and ensure that LDC does not steam-roller it through, for whatever reason…
The lack of publicity on the original application was a disgrace.
I have very mixed thoughts on the idea of wind turbines so close by but I certainly don’t want them forced upon us without any democratic input to the decision.
Mr Ellis’ position of wanting to make sure we get a say is quite right and we, as residents, must make sure we take that chance.
Whatever the views.
So much for democracy last time with the ’small’ mast!! The planners may well have done the legal minimum as far as advertising is concerned but what about a bit of common decency?
This isn’t an application for a car port and I fail to see how the local notification for somewhere to park the car can be the same as for an 80metre wind mast which is likely to result in a cluster of turbines nearly 150metres high.
Let’s hope people take the opportunity our county councillor has presented by filling in the publicity gap for us and influence the decision by Lichfield council when it happens.
I fear Maria Bradley and some of that mindset have it all “a bit wrong”.
Wind turbines of this nature and size will do more to harm the planet and the local environment than the planners and promoters of such would have you believe.
There is nothing ‘green’ about wind turbines. To manufacture them uses more energy (and materials) than they could save in ten years. That is when they work – ask a maintenance engineer that works on them!
They create noise pollution, are an eyesore, and to cap that, the only people to reap any real benefit will be the land owner (£++++) and the maunufacturers (£+++).
Not to mention the possibility of the benefits to a councilor for being being ‘persuaded’. Ask yourself why no publicity for the meetings etc. The only place for such turbines, is where will function as designed to, where there always plenty of wind and where they are not going to mar the landscape. Out at sea, along with oil and gas rigs, and other such unsightly but necessary equipment.
Matthew, thanks for taking the trouble to write to everyone about this application.
In the current circumstances around politics in general it’s good to feel we’ve got someone who takes responsibility to the electors seriously. Keep it up.
If we are consulted its not such a problem as everyone has an opportunity to air their concerns. It simply indicates something or someone is being dodgy
How does a local Councillor get away with the minimum legal requirement and why was it so secret – something for local voters to think about…
I’m not happy with the proposal or the process. The steel mast that went up before appeared to be done in secret. That must not be allowed to happen with this!!!
The secretive manner in which this process is being carried out, brings into question the motives of the local Councillor/Landowner that has a vested interest in its outcome! Is it GREEN or GREED??
So much for transparency in Council affairs!
At least Matthew Ellis is ensuring that the proposals are widely publicised and debated properly.
Has anyone locally BEEN near a windturbine? Remember the hooha and uproar when they were left on and the wind was in the wrong direction at SKEGNESS?
Has anyone considered the LOCAL MINE SHAFTS? many of which are NOT properly recorded. If two children on a swing can make a shaft open up beside them, and swallow their play area, THEN HOW MUCH DISATER IS PENDING FROM THE VIBRATION FROM WIND TURBINES?
Yes, it is true about the CHILDREN playing;-they were MY garandkids!!!! It was their garden, and NOBODY knew there was a shaft there!
So who knows what else is around, hstorically lost, unseen, and just waiting for someone to bring a half baked idea into action. I AGREE WITH GREEN POLICIES;-I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE MUCH MORE CONSULTATION ON THIS MATTER.
I welcome Matthew Ellis’s support agianst these very large turbines so close to our houses.
Whilst I am not against wind energy I am against such large turbines being located so close to our homes.
The problem is much wider than simply visual impact – there is evidence to show living so close to these large structures casues ill health, noise, vibration, light flicker and other constant and ongoing problems.
Peter Luff, conservative MP Evesham is proposing a statutory distance of 2.5 miles from such large turbines from dwellings – this seems like a sensible approach and should be included in the Council’s Sub regional Policy.
Hello everybody, my name is Paul Nott (Harlaston) and I attended the meeting at Clifton regarding the proposed wind turbines.
I went to the meeting with an open mind, I am pro-green and believe that whether we like it or not energy generation such as wind turbines will play its part in meeting the energy demands of the future.
However, the way this application has been managed really worries me in that this proposal is gaining momentum without consultation with the local community. Green energy and the owner of the land concerned (a local councillor with influence within Lichfield council’s planning department who stands to gain financialy if this proposal suceeds – -brings back memories of recent M.Ps antics!!!) do themselves no favours by NOT attending public meetings. It was strange that both parties had more pressing engagments rather than discussing the issues that worry many local residents. Perhaps when the next meeting is arranged it can be arranged around Councillor Bennion busy schdule so that both sides can have their say. My own opinion is that wind farms such as this should not be built so close residential property, as in Scotland, it’s ironoc that the German company involved, ProWind GBH, would not be able to build this development in its home land but in the UK its OK !
So where do we go from here, my own research in Harlaston shows a general lack of knowledge of what’s happening in the community, people do not understand how they will be affected and how big these turbines are. I am more than happy to help in any way with publicising these proposals so that people can form their own opinions on this matter pro or against.
If anybody wishes to contact me please e-mail paul.nott@fsmail.net
I would also like to say that I am not political in any way but was impressed with how the recent meeting was conducted and the commitment from Matthew Ellis.
Interesting website: http://www.windturbinenoisehealthhumanrights.com/wtnhhr_june2007.pdf
Suggests that a safe buffer zone of at least 2km should exist between family dwellings and industrial wind turbines of up to 2MW installed capacity, with greater separation for a wind turbine greater than 2MW installed capacity. If this is not respected it could be a violation of Article 8 of the European Court of Human Rights Act!
Matthew
I may only be a local Tamworth Councillor – and not of your political persuation on probably many things – but I will join with you on this issue if you would allow it.
My first thought was “who’s making the money?”. I had a local landowner in mind (£20,000 to landowners for each Windmill!) when I read your article – and saw I was right! It does not surprise me. This same landowner/farmer has made a killing out of our membership of the EU too – with it’s insane Common Agricultural Policy. He used to be in the same party as me many years ago (Social Democrats) but to my mind he has sold his soul to the money. We are now very different people.
On the wind turbines. The profits do NOT come from successful operation. Far more they come from taxes on our normal fuel bills to pay for these monstrosities. Nigh on 100% Government subsidies!! In this case going to a German firm. In fact I don’t think a British company exists that makes or erects these things. It makes no sense!
Of the 2,300 Wind turbines already erected in the UK their combined power output is no more than one medium sized conventional power station. They are worse than useless. If they reach a maximum of 30% of claimed “maximum” output I will be surprised. Probably less than 20% output is a truer figure. There is no doubt that these things are costly, grossly inefficient and a blight on local communities.
It’s only as a result of successive British Government’s abject – indeed deliberate! – failure to provide for our future energy needs that is forcing us to build these things. Even so it is physically impossible to build sufficient of them – not even coming close – to replace the convential power stations that are scheduled to close.
There WILL be power blackouts across the country if we don’t change this “green” energy policy. We WILL be buying in large chunks of our energy needs at ridiculously high prices from French nuclear power stations through French companies who already control a great deal of our power generation and supplies in this country.
In fact the “greenest” solution now would be for a British Government to commission several new nuclear plants. The nuclear power generation technology has moved on. You cannot get anything safer than the Chinese invented “Pebble Bed” nuclear technology. It will take time – I’m sure we now cannot avoid the blackouts.
It has been pure stupidity and bigoted “environmentalism” that is forcing Britain down the wind turbine route. It will fail.
Meanwhile – if there is a planning battle to be fought around the Tamworth area on this issue – then count me in!
I have a PhD in human physiology and since my last posting have been doing some research into the health implications of wind farms. There is a growing body of evidence that there are health risks including heart disease, migraine, panic attacks and sleep distrubances. Please see attached article:
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/are-wind-farms-a-health-risk-us-scientist-identifies-wind-turbine-syndrome-1766254.html
for further details.
The UK expert quoted in this report, Dr Christopher Hanning, works in Leicester and seems to be supporting other campaigns against wind farms near to residental areas – I will continue to follow this up and see if I can get more information,
Secondly, I’m really concerned about the lack of local knowledge regarding the wind farm proposal and suggest that fliers are distributed direct to peoples’ home before the next meeting in early Dec. I would be more than happy to distribute these in Harlaston – if the action group need someone.
Matthew
We are residents at Dunnimere Farm.Firstly we are all very grateful to have you on side to fight this . We are more than happy to get involved and help how we can . We have already sent letters to Mr Bennion and will let you have copies. Our neighbour has also contacted the Tamworth Herald who are interested in a feature and are coming to Dunnimere Farm on Mon 30th November. Please do keep us informed and let us know how we can help to spread the message with fliers.
If you are able to attend on Monday this would be fabulous and very much appreciated.
We paced the distance from our home to the test mast on Sunday with our 4 year old – it is only 500 metres – 1/3rd of a mile away therefore we are clearly extremely concerned regarding this proposed development.
Count me in! I am also very to happy to help. Has anyone got a template ready to use as I dont mind printing some and I think the message should be consistent so one sign for all. I see that the Herald are visiting on 30th November – are we all being asked to turn up or is this not an open invitation? I think the turn out last week would look great on a photo as I was surpised how many people turned up. I had a letter from Prowind today re. their exhibition 3rd Dec 2 til 7:30pm. I cant register for updates as their website wont let me so please keep me in the loop. I am very happy to help support and also help with leflets etc. I didnt think to write to Mr Benion when I wrote to the council so if you could forward me a copy of your letter I will do the same.
LIBERAL DEMOCRATS
R I P
I live in Haunton and, unbelievably, because I do not have the Parish Magazine, I and my husband were totally unaware of the scale of the proposed windmills until the meeting 2 weeks ago. (Just to underline the point about lack of public awareness!!)
We have lived in this peaceful and picturesque village for 21 years and will not stand by and see it and the surrounding area wrecked.
We were not initially against the proposal but now we’ve learned just how big the windmills will be we cannot believe that something which will have such a negative impact (visual and noise) on our village can even be considered.
I’m ashamed that I’ve only just become aware of the true scale of the proposals. I’m frightened that it will completely wreck our lives. I will do all I can to fight this application. Can someone tell me – is there actually a project group who are co-ordinating opposition to this?
Hi much like Jane Charlton i was not initially opposed to this project but as a resident of Haunton for over 20 years I have no intention of idly standing by whilst this sizable and really concerning project unfolds, please let me know if there is now a project group in place and how i can get involved
I’ve been to the exhibition today and I have to admit that, from the facts presented I am much reassured. Pro-wind have produced display boards to show the visual impact of the proposed site from various locations and I am no longer personally concerned about this aspect. As far as noise goes, I plan to visit the 10 turbine site at Burton Wolds, near the village of Burton Latimer which is near Kettering just off the A14 to hear for myself. I understand from the company that the turbine noise is most noticeable during periods of light wind when they are only just turning.
So, in summary, I’ve been reassured by the facts. I’m afraid there is a lot of near hysterical misinformation being circulated which had me extremely worried!
By the way. For those of you who want to judge for yourselves, I asked if the graphic boards could be displayed either in Haunton or Clifton so that those who weren’t able to make the exhibition today could see them and this was agreed to. Phil Bennion has taken a set of boards and is going to arrange for them to be displayed so that more local people can have access to them.
I also visited the exhibition last night and my experience was the opposite to Jane Charlton’s. I went in quite open to the idea and just wanted to know the facts. I am very concerned for my property value.Unfortunately I left filled with resolve to oppose this strongly.
The images displayed made my heart rate rise to see how phenomonally massive the structures will be. This is not agriculture this is industry. And the reality is that Haunton, Harlaston, Clifton, Thorpe and Wigginton will be affected for 9 months during construction. Syerscote lane will house the cabling to take the electricity back to Tamworth and so will be dug up.
The environmental testing was commisioned by pro wind, hardly independent then? The testing was done over a 2 week window, not over different seasons and there fore not considering different air pressures and weathers and how these conditions affect how sound travels.
My biggest fear is that this particular project will open the flood gates. We will soon live in a wind farm valley. Why wouldn’t any landowner want to take an 80,000 annual salary? I already know of one who stated he’s keen to see it approved so that he can do the same thing.
The valley will change rapidly and I am certain this is the beginning of the disappearance of the agricultral belt between this valley and the surrounding towns.
And as for property value? I was informed there is evidence to say it drops in the short term. There was no definition of what is short term, but if my fears prove true then subsequent wind farm developments will extend the ’short term’ into a much longer reality. The company I spoke to last night had no plans for how to offset local people’s losses against their profits.
The testing has only looked at the imapct on the physical environment and no one has consulted us on the impact toi the human environment. How can we look after the planet when we will be battling to save our smaller world first.
Matthew,
Thanks for your very full email response to my questions to you and I echo the praise others have given you for doing your job so professionally for local people… it’s refreshing bearing in mind the state of politics at present with all parties.
I wasn’t going to comment publicly but felt I must in response to an earlier poster who felt more comfortable having seen the proposals at the hall.
I should make it clear I’m not criticising those views I’m just intrigued that the actual facts can in any way be better than the perception of what we were going to expect. I’m afraid like everyone I’ve talked to I believe them to be far worse visually than I had imagined.
They are incredibly imposing!
We went to the exhibition yesterday and are not reassured in any way. We live at Dunnimere Farm the closest residential property to the proposed site. How does a local Councillor get away with minimum legal requirements and why has this process been so secret ? This company would not be allowed to do this in Germany so why are they allowed in the UK?
I think the statement GREEN or GREED is very appropriate.
Matthew, thank you so much for your support and we are willing to do whatever we can to help you stop this happening.
Consciously not wishing to alienate people who live in our local area I thought I’d remain nameless. I’m actually less concerned about the impact of these things but very very concerned at the underhand approach to the process to date.
I have challenged our esteemed local council planners on this and they tell me no application has yet been received and therefore it hasn’t been publicised. They even said, and I quote, ‘the only reason anyone knows about it is because of Mr Ellis’ ……. as though that is a problem to them!!! Well a big thank you to the latter for it I say.
And for the record I am objecting to this proposal now principally because of the attitude and underhand tactics……. remember the testing mast, that was an actual application and yet few knew!!!!!
I visited the website and saw the display units which appeared to demonstrate that these wind turbines would be virtually invisible. I asked Phil Bennion to arrange for one set of these pictures to be retained in the area for ongoing display and he has done this. However I also asked one of the engineers why none of the pictures showed St Andrew’s church and, frankly, received a load of waffle. Each unit, from base to tip of upstanding sail arm, will be twice the height of St Andrew’s church. I suggested that this made the presentation dishonest and therefore that an undistorted view showing the church should be added. If this is not forthcoming I think we shall need to engage our own photographers to give a more accurate representation of how these turbines will look in the landscape – and have them ready in time for the planning application.
Like most, I am disgusted at the thought of a wind farm being built in such a beautiful residential area. From reading the relevant research, it would appear that wind turbines are not actually the clean, reliable, efficient source of energy that some supporters believe them to be. Although they are promoted as an environmentally friendly way of producing electicity the amount of energy produced is negligibe. This development will have a significant and undesirable impact on the surrounding villages- although no doubt will make one local landowner very wealthy!!
Interesting article in times on line
http://www.times on line.co.uk/to/news/environment/article6954565.ece
I’ve spent some time searching the internet for opinions on these things. As far as I’m concerned a pattern is forming in my mind which suggests to me that the information in advance of these type of developments doesn’t always fit the actual experience afterwards.
There are dozens of websites with first hand experience on them and as far as I can see if you live more than a mile and a half from wind turbines then the only real issue is the visual look of them to an area.
However, this talk of 500metres (less than a third of a mile) doesn’t seem to ring true as there are many examples where residents have felt some impact from them from as far away as a mile and a quarter or about 2000 metres. So that’s four times this magical 500 metres!
People talk of ‘temporary nuisance’. That appears to mean nuisance based on time of day, wind direction, position of the sun and various anomolies. The common examples are tiredness and general low mood which are thought to be caused by the blade thump as they turn and hedaches because of something called light flicker which is caused when the sun is behind the turbine blades.
The above are perceived to be a problem from far more than 500 metres away but because they are only an issue for part of the day and at unpredictable times they are dimissed under planning rules. It is also suggested the seriousness of the effects varies from one person to another depending on individual health and biological make up.
I was fairly neutral to this proposal originally but I’ve now satisfied myself, after hours and hours of research, that there are risks that I do not want to subject my family to. I’m very much a supporter of renewable energy and of wind energy as part of that but I’m now very clear in my mind that the place where these wind turbines are built should be very much further away from people than the magic 500 metres talked about. I’m not totally convinced Hoggs Hill is the right place visually but may just have put up with that.
However, with everything else taken into account I’m now entirely opposed to the application here and will actively oppose it.
I too went to the exhibition at Haunton but unlike some I was not reassured, in fact quite the reverse. On questioning the Prowind representatives I got the distinct impression of being them being programmed particularly with regards to noise and the visual impact on the area. Noise they said met the strict guidelines of ETSU-R-97, this apparently is for wind turbines up to 32m to hub height not 80m, and as we all now know the government suppressed the findings of the review by Hayes Mckenzie Partnership prior to the publication which recommended lower noise levels. On a visual point of view it would decimate the area, just visit a wind farm and judge for yourselfs and like those who live by them, like ourselves if this goes ahead, wished they could have prevented this madness. I will be actively opposing the application.
Matthew,
Excellent work on this website. Exceptionally informative. Until I saw your size comparison illustration I’d no idea just how big these windturbines are. The ones for Haunton seem much bigger than ones I’ve seen in the past and I’d no idea the visual damage would be as big as this. People in Lichfield and Tamworth towns will surely see these they are so enormous!
Proposed Wind Turbines
We would like to express our support for many of the excellent and critical points so well put by others.
We live in Clifton Campville, we do not overlook the proposed site, but we see the test mast whenever we drive out of the village. We appreciate the need to develop cleaner forms of energy generation, and are not strongly opposed to wind farms as such in appropriate places, though we do have real concerns about their cost-effectiveness and other issues.
Now the proposals for Hoggs Hill Wind farm have become public knowledge, there has in consequence been a public meeting and an exhibition by ProWind. We have been impressed by the great strength of local feeling against the proposals. A weak case for this development has been further weakened by the misleading pictures in the exhibition that did not truly represent the real visual intrusion of such turbines. How can existing pylons be made to appear taller and more prominent than the turbines? Why has St. Andrew’s church disappeared?
There appear to be a growing number of reasons why this scheme should go no further.
The scheme poses a number of threats:
a) to people – especially in Haunton and Harlaston – who will live within sight and sound of it (recent research confirms that constant low level noise is a major cause of stress and related health problems)
b) to wildlife, both in the air and on the ground
c) to an area of sensitive and unexplored archaeology, with former mine workings
d) to an essentially rural area where in a more sensible past the power of wind and water was harnessed but on a human scale
e) to the visual amenity – industrial-scale moving turbines dwarfing Grade I-listed St Andrew’s Church. The current test mast is visible from a considerable distance – Cannock Chase, Barr Beacon, Lichfield and Charnwood Forest etc
f) to our rural roads – already prone to flooding
We have yet to hear a convincing argument why a scheme so detrimental to life in this area should go ahead. It would appear that the only benefits will be to the company, the landowner in question, and as a token act towards “green” credentials of the Local Authority.
If it does proceed, it will be a symbol of the breakdown of local democracy, with the worrying prospect of acts of civil disobedience. We suspect that future generations will have cause to regret the current trend to pepper the countryside with noisy, intrusive and inefficient turbines. Such plans are best left to gather dust, with the decade just past.
Global warming, despite some scientists adverse views, is a fact. Our planet is suffering from the effects of pollution and we need to find a source of cleaner energy. However, I do agree low level noise causes a strange sort of stress; these structures are not invincible, i.e. the one that was mysteriously damaged by unknown forces; and while there were once hundreds of windmills in Staffs alone, these are gargantuan. I think there are things we should be doing first, such as restarting the dormant hydro dams in Scotland that once provided water and electricity for a large part of that country. These could also be set up on estuaries. Outlying farms in the north and Scotland at which I`ve stayed, rely on solar energy, and its efficient, cheap and plentiful. Barns and outhouses are heated and powered by this source. There are alternatives to foisting on residents something they don`t feel easy about.
I spent many happy years in the beautiful village of Harlaston where my parents still live and where I visit regularly. I am absolutely horrified to hear about this Wind Farm proposal in such a beautiful location…why cant this be placed out at sea and not in an area where people choose to live. It will not benefit the local community at all only those that are going to benefit financially i.e. the landowner/councillor. I have recently visited Gran Canaria where they are located on the coast. The turbines are noisy and unsightly and will spoil our very precious countryside and for what purpose except to line someones pocket!!!! Also what about the impact on local communities when heavy lorries are going to and from the site through our country lanes. It is also a disgrace that the planning permission was kept away from local residents I wonder why!!! I would think that there is something very underhand going on which has to be stopped. There is no need to have these horrible ugly things located in such tranquil and beautiful countryside when there are plenty of other locations to put them i.e. out at sea and there are plenty of other alternatives like solar energy so Matthew, together we have to stop these proposals for the sake of all of us who want to preserve our rare and precious countryside.
Leave a Comment