Seòmar agus comataidhean

Graham Lang submission of 27 July 2021

PE1864/JJJJ - Increase the ability of communities to influence planning decisions for onshore windfarms

I support the aims of this petition.

My experience concerned two proposed developments in East Fife made by the same developer.

The first proposal was for 5 turbines near Auchtermuchty located where they would loom over the village and be an unavoidable feature from all roads approaching the village and dominate the dwellings to the east.  

The developer hosted a meeting for the Auchtermuchty community to outline their proposals. A campaign group Auchtermuchty Landscape and Environment Group emerged to oppose the proposal. Fife Council, the Planning Authority, recommended approval but this recommendation was overturned by the planning committee who refused the application. The developer appealed that decision and a local public inquiry was heard by a Reporter from The Directorate of Planning and Environmental Appeals (DPEA).

The campaign group were able to retain the services of a highly respected Planning Advocate, QC so there were three bodies giving evidence.  The applicant, Fife Council and the Auchtermuchty Landscape and Environment Group (ALE).  The reporter found in favour of ALE so that meant that the developer lost the appeal and could not come back with another application for that site.

The second proposal, near Ceres, was initially for 13 turbines, reduced to 5 in the Planning Application on the same elevation and due south of our property which comprised of our dwelling house and two small letting properties.  In total 21 windows faced the development with the nearest turbine located 650 metres away. 

The development would have been highly visible from the road in from Cupar to the north and the main St Andrews to Kirkcaldy Road that passes through Ceres from east to west.

The developer hosted a meeting on 24th May 2007 in Craigrothie Village Hall, two miles west of Ceres, which was attended by more than 300 residents including the farmer hosting the wind farm.  He was the only supporter of the project present other than the developer’s two representatives. 

The planning application was submitted on 1st June 2007. The local planning authority planner recommended approval. 

The action group Ceres and District Environment & Amenity Protection, www.cadeap.org, was formed to oppose the proposed windfarm. It lodged a formal objection which was shaped by addressing planning policy, landscape concerns, visual and residential amenity.  The group had the benefit of advice from a planning consultant, a landscape architect, a geologist to prepare a report on ground conditions including old mine workings and a noise expert to assess impact on residential amenity of low frequency sound and shadow flicker.   In all areas gaps and misinformation in the developer’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) were found. 

The planning application finally came before the North East Fife Planning Committee on 17th June 2009 when it was refused by the local councillors in the packed Cupar Burgh Chambers.

The Planning Committee decided, in terms of the Fife Local development Plan, that the site selected was not suitable for a wind farm development.

The developer had the right of appeal within 3 months from the date of refusal which they did not exercise.

We were of course extremely fortunate to have the resources and contacts to engage professional advisors and without that steer the outcome may well have been different.  Nowadays it is far from a level playing field that rural communities find themselves on and this Petition seeks to go some way to redress the balance in what is a developer led process.

I believe that this history explains why the action called for in the petition is needed.