CAMPAIGNERS say they are disappointed that plans for a 126-metre high wind turbine in Beeston Rylands have been turned down.
The turbine was one of three proposed by the University of Nottingham, with the other two to be built in Clifton.
Broxtowe Borough Council turned down the application for the turbine in Beeston Rylands with Nottingham City Council set to decide on the other two turbines in the future.
Brian Goss, of Nottingham Pro Wind Alliance, said: "We are very disappointed by the decision of Broxtowe council to refuse the university's proposal to install a wind turbine on its land.
"We are surprised the council does not appear to support the university as a major local employer."
A University of Nottingham spokesperson said the decision was disappointing.
He added: "It is also very surprising, given that one of Broxtowe Borough Council's key Green Objectives, laid out in its corporate plan, is to take a lead in promoting renewable energy.
"This was an excellent opportunity for the council to demonstrate its commitment to renewable energy and lend its support for a scheme that has the potential to reduce carbon emissions in the area by 7,000 tonnes a year.
"The university has spent more than five years developing a scheme that will help in the battle against climate change by generating electricity with wind turbines, one of which would be within Broxtowe borough.
"We will now take time to consider the council's decision and review the comments made in detail, before deciding on the next steps in this process."
Broxtowe Borough Council's development control committee discussed the plans on Wednesday.
Councillors refused to grant permission for the turbine in Grove Farm Field, Lenton Lane, because it would be too close to the Boots site, which could be developed for housing in the future.
Officers said the turbine would have an unacceptable impact on these plans and councillors added it would lead to loss of amenity for residents living nearby as well as loss of visual amenity.
More than 200 residents signed a petition against the plans, claiming it was too close to housing, unsafe for aircraft and would impact on the natural beauty of the area.
