Even before Octopus Energy formally submitted its planning application to erect a 294-foot wind turbine on a site some 397 feet above sea level in Bigbury, a senior planning officer at South Hams District Council had already expressed concerns.

“Undoubtedly,” he wrote, “the principal potential impact arising from the siting of a large wind turbine in this location would be its inevitable visual and landscape impact. It is accepted that, due to the character, scale and siting of the proposal in the context of the topography and surrounding land uses this may prove contentious and of great concern.”

He was right. Ringmore Parish Council admitted its members were “equally divided” and so offered no comment on a neighbouring parish’s application.

The site is prominent in the South Devon National Landscape, visible from Burgh Island and the South Devon Heritage Coastal Area. Despite government enthusiasm for renewables, the Joint Local Plan, the National Planning Policy Framework, and the Bigbury Neighbourhood Plan all weigh heavily against approval.

The Neighbourhood Plan clearly states: “Proposals for solar arrays or wind turbines on open farmland will not be supported.” Policy DEV33 of the JLP requires sites for turbines to be specifically allocated, which this one was not.

Supporters have tried to argue that the Neighbourhood Plan is out of date or that there is broad public backing. Yet the evidence is weak.

The chair of Bigbury Net Zero claimed 81 per cent of respondents at an Octopus consultation supported the scheme. But the actual question asked was: “If your concerns were addressed, would you support the wind turbine project?” Even after being shown photomontages, the main issue raised was still: “Landscape and Visual Impact.” Conditional support is hardly the same as clear approval.

Octopus themselves argue the turbine would not have “significant impacts in relation to the landscape character or visual receptors.” Yet their own Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment admits: “It was not possible to walk all the PRoWs and drive all the roads within the Study Area. However, an assessment was made based on views using Google Earth and reverse visibility from the Site.”

Desk research is no substitute for proper fieldwork. Before any claim is made that the turbine will have no significant impact, Octopus should fly a hot air balloon to 90 metres so residents and visitors can judge for themselves.

The need for this is reinforced by the Neighbourhood Plans for Bigbury, Aveton Gifford, and Ringmore, which all stress the area’s dependence on tourism. Anything that damages the natural beauty risks harming the visitor economy and undermining sustainable growth.

As for the suggestion, the Neighbourhood Plan is invalid because it passed its fifth birthday shortly before the application, both the NPPF and a Court of Appeal ruling in Peel Investments v Secretary of State for Housing [2020] confirm this is not the case.

Finally, Octopus includes a “Limitation of use” on their Planning Statement, declaring: “Use or reproduction by any third party is not permitted without express written consent.” Since reading a document is arguably “using” it, one might think Octopus would prefer the public not to engage too closely with their proposal.

Fortunately, section 30 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 ensures you can. You have until next Thursday, September 11, to submit your views. Full details of the application are here 1974/25/FUL