Planning permission unanimously rejected
Well, the first battle has been won. Enertrag's proposal was unanimously (7-0) rejected by the South Norfolk District Council (SNDC) planning committee in front of a packed audience last Tuesday, 5th August 2008.
The speakers representing SHOWT and the interested Parish Councils all gave excellent presentations, clearly persuading the planning committee that the recommendation against the proposal, by Paul Whitham, the Chief Planning Officer at South Norfolk, was fully justified.
The planners had already received objections from SHOWT, and the parish councils of Hempnall, Saxlingham, Shotesham, Woodton, plus recommendations of refusal from Tasburgh, Topcroft and Morningthorpe. Other objectors include Richard Bacon M.P., and county councillor, Adrian Gunson.
Regrettably, it seems that, despite Enertrag's initial promise to take into account public opinion before deciding whether to pursue this most unpopular scheme has being shown to be the lie it clearly is - they intend appealing despite the overwhelming vote against.
To date, SNDC have recorded, on their website, some 650 individually written letters against the proposal, and approximately 60 in favour, (most of which are not individually written, but a downloadable template from Enertrag's own website, from which we can make our own conclusions).
It is clear to most people that the number of contributory factors against the proposal put forward by SHOWT and the Parish Councils, and the overwhelming opposition of local people result in an irrefutable case, yet still Enertrag and their few supporters continue on down their lucrative path.
In the words of Hilary Battye, SHOWT spokesman "Of course we are delighted the planning committee has voted against this proposal, recognising the unsuitability of the site because of unacceptable visual intrusion. The appropriate planning policies have been applied with rigour and therefore it is the right result.
We are, however, mindful of Enertrag's right of appeal, and certainly their normal behaviour to do so. We hope they will give a thought to the level of opposition to this proposal, and the fact that this is not a suitable site, a view we feel a planning inspector will share".