Lichfield MP Michael Fabricant has described plans to build a 126-metre high wind turbine as “a joke”.

Plans have been submitted to Lichfield District Council for the turbine on Watery Lane.

But Severn Trent’s proposal has drawn criticism from Lichfield’s MP.

Mr Fabricant said:

“This has got to be some sort of joke.  The total height visible will be 126 metres above the ground.  The centre of the turbine will be 80 metres above the ground with each blade being over 46 metres long.  To put this in some perspective, the highest tower of Lichfield Cathedral is under 79 metres so will be utterly dwarfed by this turbine which will be visible for miles around Lichfield.

“Conservation of the environment ought to be a balance between the need to conserve non-renewable energy sources while not destroying the immediate environment in the process.  And while near neighbours will be disturbed by the noise, Samuel Johnson’s spires of Lichfield’s Cathedral and Churches – which he named as ‘The Ladies in the Vale’, as well as more recent constructions like the Armed Forces Memorial, will all be totally overshadowed by this incongruous and ill-placed construction.

“While I fight to keep the character of Lichfield in order to attract tourist money to boost the economy of the area, developments like this will do untold damage.  I urge local councillors to oppose this planning application.”

But Severn Trent’s planning statement claimed the wind turbines could contribute to the Lichfield landscape. It said:

“Whether turbines are considered to be acceptable or not is very much in the ‘eye of the beholder’. Some people will be positively disposed to them finding that they do not impair enjoyment of the countryside, viewing them as iconic or majestic structures, others will perceive them to be an unwelcome and alien feature in the landscape.”

Residents can have their say on the proposals on Lichfield District Council’s planning website.


Founder of Lichfield Live and editor of the site.

6 replies on “Lichfield MP slams wind turbine proposal as ‘a joke’”

  1. Regarding tourism – i don’t see how the windmill will put people off. Of course it could affect the viability of further development  – opening the floodgates?
    Friarsgate has passed planning but offers nothing that other nearby towns don’t already have – doing something “different” but still in character with Lichfield would attract people to the area.

    I think the other issues regarding the windmills effectiveness, noise levels and effect on the view are rather debatable. If there are to be windmills in this area – the proposed location is probably the best place for them. (and according to government windmill quotas, lichfield is certain to get some)

    They may turn out to be a pointless farce – but they’ve been rubber stamped at the highest level.
    Picking the least obtrusive spot is probably our best tactic.

    Can anybody think of a better place for them?

  2. He didn’t like the old post office on Bird Street being left derelict, complained about it and New Minster House was built which he likes even less. Perhaps his complaint about the proposed wind turbine will see us lumbered with a nuclear power station.

    Or maybe what he thinks has zero impact on local planning decisions.

  3. To be fair to Uncle Mickey – it seems the opinions of Lichfields’ general public generally have zero impact on planning decisions.

  4. Quoting the Facebook Group (

    – Can I also propose a marching slogan of “Down with MPs, up with Turbines!”
    – Support Lichfield Wind Turbine, not Ill-informed MP!
    – …but they are so beautiful…and sing a song of our future. …and sustainable,get with it.
    – And to think I thought of Fabricant as an really good local MP…gotta say I’m surprised, but this time he really needs to be shown some sense.

    Can I really add anything more to this? I think it perfectly sums up my opinions!

  5. Interested in people’s reactions to this. At the end of the day, it’s not my decision, it is the Council’s. And while I realise that in the Close the turbine would hardly be visible – if at all – from afar (like Pipe Hill), it be a landmark. Some will argue that it will be attractive. I am not so sure. More to the point, I am unconvinced about the physics of a single turbine and its ability to produce power and the use of non sustainable materials to construct it in the first place. It only has a limited life span too.

  6. I am unconvinced by your argument. First of all I’d point out that the council aren’t paying for the wind turbine – so any loss it makes due to its lifespan and efficiency is being taken by the Trent Valley Water. If a company is willing to put up wind turbines they obviously think there would be an advantage in it. Most companies I’m sure give up at just the thought of the planning obstructions

    Secondly is one wind turbine better than none? At least we’ll have SOME renewable energy being produced. Maybe one day if they see the people’s support for the plan they’ll build more around here.

    As far as I’m concerned if a big company thinks it is worthwhile putting one up, despite cost, opposition and inefficiencies they must think there is some BIG gain to be made from it! Not only this, I’d encourage them to build more!

Comments are closed.