Controversial Gartlandstown solar farm refused planning permission
The controversial planning application for a solar farm on a 215-acre site at Gartlandstown, Crookedwood has been refused by Westmeath County Council.
The application by Neoen Renewables Ireland Ltd, which angered many residents living in the vicinity, was refused by local planners on three grounds.
The council said that the site of the proposed development is “located within a scenic and culturally sensitive undulating and rolling landscape...which is partially located within a designated High Amenity Area”. If granted planning permission the development would “give rise to a visually obtrusive form in an open, undulating and attractive rural area”.
The council also said that the proposed development “may pose a risk of significant effects on the conservation objectives and integrity of Lough Derravaragh Special Protection Area”.
The council said that the proposed development “may have an adverse ecological impact and would be contrary to policies set out in the county development plan”.
Westmeath County Council's planning department received around 70 objections to the proposed development with most coming from people living in the locality.
In their submissions, objectors noted that the development site is located in a High Amenity Area and is also on prime agricultural land. Many also raised concerns about the environmental and ecological impact of the development if it goes ahead.
Cllr Denis Leonard in his submission stated that he had “serious reservations about the size, scale and location of the solar farm”.
“I fear that this may also be a precursor to further incremental large energy development in the area that do not take account of its topography, tourist potential, and the lack of consultation with the local community.
“...I am all for meeting renewable targets and Westmeath making its contribution, but with nine or 10 forms of renewable technologies and not just two,” Cllr Leonard said.
John Geoghegan said that his “was not a NIMBY submission”.
“I do not live in the close proximity. However, I do feel that this development in this location is absolutely outrageous in terms of its visual impact on the overall visual amenity. There are an abundance of alternative locations that would suit this better...”
Mr Geoghegan also said that while he understands “the approach by the landowner to pursue this as an economically viable alternative to farming”, the proposed development would “create such a destruction of the visual beauty of an area like this”.