A group of Scottish Borders community councils have lodged a formal objection to a proposed wind farm near Hawick, claiming 'significant errors and omissions' in the developer’s plans.
The project, proposed by Dublin-based energy firm ESB, seeks permission to build up to 13 turbines, each reaching 230 metres in height, on land owned by the Church of England at Millmoor Rig. The area has become a hotspot for wind energy, with 13 other developments currently in scoping or planning.
Seven community councils from the surrounding areas have signed the objection, accusing the developer of failing to collaborate meaningfully with local residents.
Southdean Community Council chairman Philip Kerr said the omissions in ESB’s application included missing two-thirds of the area’s tourist accommodation and errors in peat calculations.
More Renewables News
- Howden expands £150m renewable energy insurance facility
- Free online tool helps UK landowners assess wind potential
- Swinney launches skills hub to boost energy transition
“New properties have been built since, more eagles are flying around and there should be things in their plans that there aren’t,” Mr Kerr said. “Private water supply is all in the wrong places, for example. There’s just example after example showing they haven’t done their homework.”
Mr Kerr said lessons must be learned from the troubled Pines Burn wind farm, also near Hawick, which experienced major delays and repeated transport issues during construction.
“It was just a car crash,” he said. “Part of those issues were a failure to understand a community and being ignored. We don’t want to go down that road again.”
Community councils are developing Local Place Plans under Scottish Government planning reforms, which give residents a formal voice in shaping local development.
“The place plan process has meant we have a much greater understanding within our area and it therefore shows even more how little these developers have done when it comes to doing their homework,” Mr Kerr added.
An ESB spokesperson said the firm remains committed to engagement: “The 'additional information' submission was to provide clarifications and updates to the application. While the submission does not respond to individual community council responses, we will write directly to each of the community councils on this matter. We will continue to engage on the plans as the project goes through the planning process.”
Share