A BID to build an almost 125-metre-high wind turbine near Neilston has been rejected after planners warned it would have a “significant” detrimental impact on the landscape.
Officials at East Renfrewshire Council recommended the application was turned down as the “scale and design of the proposed turbine” were considered “well beyond what the local area can accommodate”.
Andy Brand, of Nether Carswell III Ltd, had applied for permission to erect the turbine on a site to the south of Nether Carswell cottage, Kingston Road, Neilston, in September 2020.
The application claimed the development was acceptable, and the visual impact would not be significant. However, councillors on the planning committee supported the view of the officials and refused to grant planning permission.
Councillor Jim McLean, Conservative, who chaired the planning committee meeting, said: “I think it’s very, very big in comparison to what we currently have there.
“In the papers we currently have, there is no mention of any community benefit coming back from this. On these grounds, I would favour the planners’ recommendation to refuse.”
The bid to build a 125m high turbine received 20 objections, with a range of concerns including the noise and visual impact as well as the lack of community benefit from the installation.
It would have generated around 4.2MW of electric power and had an operational life of around 25 years. There are currently two turbines operating near the site: Nether Carswell I and II.
Officials reported the turbine was “of a much larger scale with a much greater rotor diameter than its fellow Nether Carswell turbines”.
They added: “The closest height to the application turbine are the existing Nether Carswell turbines I and II.
"Respectively these turbines have blade tip heights of 77m and 80m - some 33% smaller than the proposed NC III turbine.”
While planning policies encourage renewable energy development, planners said the turbine is “not in keeping with the prevailing scale of turbine development in the area”.
“This additional height and its particularly large rotor sweep results in a significantly larger active form with a resultant detrimental impact on the local landscape and aspects from local landmarks, for example Neilston Pad,” they added.
A report by officials concluded the proposal “raises significant issues when considered against the development plan”.
It said: “Principally these relate to the scale and design of the proposed turbine which is considered well beyond what the local area can accommodate without significant detrimental landscape and residential amenity impacts.”
Councillor Andrew Morrison, Conservative, said: “We know the value of renewable energy, but here we are talking about 4.2MW, which sounds a lot but in terms of the country’s energy needs, it’s actually quite small.
“We’ve got to balance that need for renewable energy with sympathy for the amenity of the area and the environment.”
Planners said a decision on the application had been delayed from 2020 due to the ongoing consideration of a complaint regarding turbine noise from a local resident, and the lack of a consultation response from Prestwick Airport.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel