Dunnet residents vote against wind farms
A number of residents in and around Dunnet are furious that their community has not had a voice in two controversial wind farms being earmarked for nearby areas.
Two locals felt so strongly that they booked a meeting to give people the chance to air their views on plans to put up 30 turbines east of Spittal Hill and 13 turbines at Durran Mains, near Castletown.
As well as registering opposition to both schemes, the residents called on Canisbay and Dunnet Community Council to rethink its refusal to take a stance as the developments lie outwith its boundaries. The community council was also criticised for failing to send a representative to Monday’s meeting in Dunnet’s Britannia Hall.
Will MacKenzie and Jim Calder organised the forum after several pleas for the community council to discuss the schemes fell on deaf ears.
The pair are among those who believe the turbines would cause an unacceptable blot on their skyline.
Helen McIntosh, who lives at Westside, Dunnet, claimed the community has been denied a say in proposals which would have a potentially major impact on it.
She said: “Our community council has not properly represented us on this. I do not see why the people of Dunnet should not have a say on this, as much as those in Watten, Castletown, Bower and Halkirk have had. To my mind, they have not done their job.”
Ms McIntosh said she does not object to wind turbines in principle and would back further development on the existing Causewaymire site.
But she added: “What I am against is the idea of putting them up willy-nilly and not taking any cognisance of the views of local people.
“We in Dunnet so far haven’t had an opportunity to express our views.”
Retired teacher Will Menzies is among those who have unsuccessfully sought to get the issue on the community council agenda.
“Our views are just not being represented,” said Mr Menzies, who is vice-chairman of Dunnet Forestry Group. “Surely they could at least have someone here tonight to hear the feelings of the folk who are here.”
Dunnet resident Angela Lewis believed that both wind farm proposals fall foul of the Highland Council’s stated policy of protecting scenic coastal views.
She said: “As both of these developments will be seen from Dunnet Head, it would seem strange were they allowed to go through.”
Sue Hawes, of Durran Windfarm Action Group, said the Durran Mains scheme is earmarked for land where there is a presumption against development.
“If an ordinary householder wanted to put up a garden shed, they would be flatly turned down, but here we have a proposal being considered to put up these massive turbines,” she said.
Mrs Hawes said Bower Community Council has also objected as it believes the information accompanying the scheme is “fatally flawed”.
Dunnet resident Hugh Boyd said the driving force for the turbine developments is the rich pickings to be gained.
“It’s all about money,” he said. “The landowners and developers stand to earn a huge amount of money as a result of this, even though it’s not going to do anything to solve global warming.”
Mr Boyd feared a repeat of the debacle in which taxpayers have had to pick up the tab for uprooting the vast tracts of commercial forests planted in the Flow Country.
He said: “I’m sure that in 20 to 30 years we’ll be taking down these windmills but in between we’ll have had to pay a fortune and had our landscape destroyed.”
Stuart Young, who chairs Caithness Wind Farm Information Group, exhibited photomontages purporting to show the Baillie turbines dominating the Dunnet skyline.
It contrasted with the adjoining image produced for the developers, in which the turbines could hardly be seen.
Mr Young said an alternative perspective could be obtained by comparing the proposed turbines with existing structures on the Caithness landscape.
The turbines at Spittal have an intended blade-tip height of 110 metres and those at Durran a blade-tip height of 90 metres.
He said this compares to the t3uk building at Janetstown, which is 27 metres tall, and the six wind turbines at Forss, which are 78 metres tall.
Those at Spittal would be as high as a 37-storey block of flats and those at Durran as high as a 30-storey block, he told the meeting.
Mr Young said that the Scottish Government has made clear its general support for new wind farms.
But he said there remains an unequivocal official pledge that no scheme should go ahead “where development would have a significant, long-term detrimental impact on people living nearby”.
Mr Young added: “I’m unaware of a single planning application in the Highlands where this has been highlighted by planning officials as a material consideration.”
Mr Young maintains that there is clear evidence in both schemes that the condition would be breached.
A show of hands of Dunnet residents at the end of the meeting registered resounding 35-0 and 37-0 votes against the Spittal and Durran schemes respectively.
The group also resolved to urge the community council to reflect local feelings about the developments.
Community council chairman John Green said yesterday: “Our position is quite clear in that because these proposed wind farm sites are not in our ward, they are not part of our remit.
“At the same time, we have said we are prepared to pass on to the Highland Council concerns that people in our area have about these schemes.”
He said protesters are welcome to attend the community council’s next meeting in Dunnet to make their views known.
“We’ll certainly take their views on board and are prepared to make representations on their behalf but, by the same token, we are clear that the issue is not part of the remit of the community council.”
Neither of the would-be developers took up invites to attend Monday’s meeting but both sent written statements which were read out by independent chairman Niall Smith, development officer with Caithness Voluntary Group.
Both said they had staged consultation meetings in the respective areas and sought to keep local people informed about their proposals.
Tom Pottinger, of Baillie Windfarm Ltd, wrote: “I am more than happy to attend and have attended properly-called public meetings.
“But as this meeting is not being held under the auspices of the community council, who have properly maintained an impartial stance on both the Durran Mains and Spittal proposals, I do not feel I would be given a fair ‘trial’ and so will not be attending.”
Mr Pottinger took issue with Mr Young’s photomontages, which he claimed are “misleading” and produced to “scaremonger”.
John Soal, development project manager with Scottish and Southern Energy, said no-one from the firm was able to attend to speak about the Durran development.
Mr Soal pointed out that SSE had been present at a meeting held in Bower soon after the scheme was launched. He added the company has downscaled its plans from the initial 32-turbine layout to address concerns about the impact on birdlife and potential visual and noise nuisance to residents.
By Iain Grant
8 October 2008
The copyright of this article is owned by the author or publisher indicated. Its availability here constitutes a "fair use" as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law as well as in similar "fair dealing" exceptions of the copyright laws of other nations, as part of National Wind Watch's effort to advance understanding of the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development. For more information, click here.
Blog it:
Tags: Wind power, Wind energy
|
