BusinessGreen report the decision by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to ban the Save Berkeley Vale (SBV) campaign from using exaggerated photomontages of proposed turbines to campaign against the planned £9m project at Stinchcombe. The advertising watchdog concluded that the group had placed wind turbines in the wrong place and overstated the length of the blades and height of the towers in the mock-up. See article here with the mock up photos - below is the one showing a more accurate presentation.
The ASA result came just one day after councillors rejected the turbine plan because of visual impact concerns - this is despite officer advice to approve the application. Green councillor John Marjoram who was one of only two councillors who voted at the planning meeting in favour of the turbines was very disappointed by the decision. Seven councillors voted against. However it looks set to go to appeal.
cost up to £100,000. He argued that the councillors who rejected the proposal should pay the cost of appeal if the farm does eventually get the go-ahead.
"This is not a democratic decision; this is where the planning system falls flat on its face," he said, adding that a survey carried out last year by GfK NOP found 66 per cent of local people supported Ecotricity's proposals for a wind park at Berkeley Vale, with just 12 per cent against.
As the only District councillor in Stroud who appears on the list of those who submitted comments in favour of these turbines I hope they will go up. As regular blog readers will know I've followed this on my blog - see for example some of the background here. But at least some good news re solar panels - see here.