Upcott

Bittadon

Barnstaple

North Devon

EX31 4HJ

Tel 01271 850588

 

31 August 2005

 

cc Mr M J Easton Planning Manager NDDC Civic Centre Barnstaple Devon EX31 1EA

The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry,

c/o Bay 2123,

1 Victoria Street,

LONDON

SW1H 0ET

 

Dear Sir,

 

 

   PLANNING APPLICATION BY DEVON WIND POWER LTD.,

   FOR A WINDFARM AT FULLABROOK DOWN, NORTH DEVON.

   PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE NO. 38622

 

1.  We refer to the Additional Environmental Information recently submitted in relation to the above proposal. 
We cannot imagine when requesting additional information that your department envisaged the need to produce a further 585 pages of documentation.

 

2.   CAWT reiterates its strong objection to the proposal for the reasons contained in our letter sent to you almost twelve months ago.

In spite of the scale of documents contained in the latest submission, nothing has been produced which in any way overcomes the fundamental objection advanced by CAWT and by other groups concerned for the future of this part of North Devon.

 

3.   In terms of visual impact many of the comments made demonstrate the unreliability of the applicants’ assessment of the visual impact of the proposal.

As an example of this, the suggestion is made in Volume 1 of the latest submission that because of the undulating nature of the sand dunes at Braunton Burrows views towards the proposed development would only be likely from the tops of the dunes within the system.

A visit to the Burrows will reveal that the development would be seen from by far the greater part of the area, including the vast area to which the public have access to the east of the highest dunes.

 

4.   Overall the analysis accepts that the turbines would be visible from many vantage points within the AONB and from elsewhere.

Unfortunately it is the impact that the development would have that continues to be understated by the applicants.

 

5.   Various references are made to “the sculptural form of the turbines having a rhythm reflected in the simplicity of the agrarian landscape”. 

It seems to be being suggested, because of this description, that the development is all the more acceptable. 

We simply cannot share this over-simplistic and cosy description of the development.  Contrary to what is said in Para 3 7 97, the location of the proposed development would not seem rational in terms of the simple form of the turbines in the context of the simple landscape character of the Plateau Downland.

 

6.  It is made clear that the proposed 132KV underground electricity line connecting the proposed wind farm to the National Grid would extend over a distance of 6.7 kilometers. 

After decades when electricity providers have been unable to fund the under-grounding of such lines, it is surprising that sufficient funds are suddenly available to do this to enable development which itself is unacceptably intrusive visually to take place. 

 

7.  We have now suffered more than 12 months of anxiety awaiting the outcome of this ill-conceived proposal. 

We urge you to reject this application or cause an inquiry to be held and look forward to the scheme being refused permission sooner rather than later.

 

Yours faithfully.

 

 

 

 

 

Richard Jerrard,

Chairman of CAWT.