Proposed Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm - Renfrewshire Council

Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm 

Pre-Application Consultation 

Report 

March 2010


Report 

Falck Renewables 


Pre- Application Consultation Report 

March 2010 

13 Coates Crescent 

Edinburgh 

EH3 7AF 

Telephone: 0131 220 6121 

Facsimile: 0131 220 6131 

Email: info@naturalcapital.co.uk 

Website: www.naturalcapital.co.uk


Report 

Falck Renewables 


Pre-Application Consultation Report 

For and on behalf of Natural Capital Ltd 

Approved by: Dr Annie Say 

Signed: 

Position: Director 

Date: 29 March 2010 

This report has been prepared by Natural Capital Ltd. with all reasonable 

skill, care and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the client, 

incorporating our General Terms and Conditions of Business and taking 

account of the resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. 

We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any 

matters outside the scope of the above. This report is confidential to the 

client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties 

to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party 

relies on the report at their own risk. 

In line with our company environmental policy we purchase paper for our 

documents only from suppliers who supply recycled and/or sustainably 

sourced paper. 

Registered Office: Natural Capital Ltd, 3 Ormidale Terrace, Edinburgh, 

EH12 6DY. Registered in Scotland. No: 185394

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1 INTRODUCTION TO THE PRE-APPLICATION (PAC) REPORT 1 

1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 

1.2 PAC CONTEXT 1 

1.3 PURPOSE OF THE PAC REPORT 1 

1.4 ERC REPORTING GUIDANCE 2 

1.5 LAYOUT OF THE PAC REPORT 2 

2 PAC ACTIVITIES 5 


2.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT 5 

2.2.1 Introduction 5 

2.2.2 Key Components of the Proposals 5 

2.2.3 The Proposed Site 5 

2.3 ADDRESS OF THE SITE 6 

2.4 CONTACT DETAILS OF THE APPLICANT 6 

2.5 SCREENING OPINION 6 

2.6 PROPOSAL OF APPLICATION NOTICE (PAN) 6 

2.7 PAC ACTIVITIES 7 

3 CONSULTEE FEEDBACK AND ALTERATIONS TO PROPOSAL 11 


3.2 WHO WAS CONSULTED? 11 

3.2.1 PAC Consultees 11 

3.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Consultees 12 

3.2.3 Landowner Consultation 13 

3.3 RECORD OF CONSULTEE VIEWS 14 

4 HOW THE PAC HAS MET PAN 81 GUIDANCE 52 

5 SUMMARY 55 


5.2 SUMMARY 55 

Annex A: Pre-Application Consultation Notice 

Annex B: Public Exhibition Information Boards 

Annex C: ` Advert for Public Exhibition 

Annex D: Information Leaflet and Distribution Maps


1 INTRODUCTION TO THE PRE-APPLICATION (PAC) REPORT 

1.1 INTRODUCTION 

This pre-application consultation (PAC) report has been prepared by Natural 

Capital Ltd to explain the consultation process that has been undertaken to inform 

the proposals for the development of a 19 turbine Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm 

near Eaglesham, Scotland. 

The proposals are being taken forward by Coriolis Energy LLP 1 on behalf of Falck 

Renewables 2 . 

This PAC will be submitted to East Renfrewshire Council (ERC) at the same time 

as the planning application and Environmental Statement (ES) for the proposals. 

1.2 PAC CONTEXT 

Effective management of stakeholder expectations and of the consultation process 

is of prime importance to the successful progression and delivery of any 

development proposals. 

The importance of successful consultation has been recently strengthened with 

the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 3 and related legislation and by the 

publication of best practice guidance set out in PAN 81: Community Engagement 4 

and other relevant guidance documents. 

Statutory requirements for PAC are set out in the Town and Country Planning 

(Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2008 and the 

relevant provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as 

amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. Scottish Government (2009) 

Scottish Planning Series Circular 4 2009: Development Management 

Procedures offers further guidance on PAC procedures. 

The purpose of PAC is to ensure communities can comment on proposals early on 

in the planning process. This will improve applications, help ensure negative 

impacts are mitigated where feasible and help address misunderstandings. 

All national and major developments require PAC between developers and 

communities. These categories are defined in the Town and Country Planning 

(Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009. A major development 

includes ‘Electricity Generation: construction of an electricity generating station - 

the capacity of the generating station is or exceeds 20 megawatts’. 

The proposed Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm has an approximate 47.5 Megawatt 

(MW) capacity which means it is classed within the ‘major’ category and is 

therefore subject to PAC. 

1.3 PURPOSE OF THE PAC REPORT 

The purpose of the PAC Report is: 

to outline the PAC process which has taken place on this project; 

1 Available: http://www.coriolis-energy.com 

2 Available: http://www.falckrenewables.com 

3 HMSO (2006) Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 

4 Scottish Government (2007) Planning Advice Note (PAN) 81: Community Engagement – Planning with People 

Natural Capital Ltd 1 Falck Renewables


to demonstrate who has been consulted; 

to set out what information was gained from consultees during PAC and how 

this was responded to; and 

to identify how the proposals have changed in light of PAC. 

1.4 ERC REPORTING GUIDANCE 

The layout and information provided in this report follows the guidance set out by 

ERC 5 on what the PAC Report should contain. This information is included in 

Table 1.1. 

Table 1.1 PAC Report Content 

PAC Report Content Location in PAC Report 

1. Description of the development Section 2.2 

2. Address of the site Section 2.3 

3. A plan of the site must be included Figure 2.1 

4. Contact details of the applicant Section 2.4 

5. Did the planning authority adopt a screening opinion? Section 2.5 

6. Did the Scottish Ministers make a screening direction? Section 2.5 

7. Enclose a copy of the Proposal of Application Notice 

stating the date it was published 

8. Date the application notice was given by applicant with 

copy of the notice enclosed 

Section 2.6 and Annex A 

Section 2.6 and Annex A 

9. The consultation that was undertaken Section 2.7 and Table 

2.1 

10. When the consultation was undertaken Table 2.1 

11. Details of the date and location of the public event Table 2.1 and Annex C 

12. The parties who were consulted Table 2.1 and Section 

3.2 

13. A summary of the views of the consultees Tables 3.1 and 3.2 

14. Specify what responses the prospective applicant has 

made to allay any concerns/objections which were raised 

15. Specify what alterations if any to the proposal have been 

made as a result of the consultations undertaken 

1.5 LAYOUT OF THE PAC REPORT 

The remainder of the report is structured as follows: 

Tables 3.1 and 3.2 

Section 4.2 

Section 2 provides information on the key information relating to the proposals 

and the consultation activities which were undertaken. 

5 East Renfrewshire Council (2009) Pre-application consultation for ‘National’ and ‘Major’ developments. 

Guidance Note for prospective applicants for planning permission 



Section 3 outlines who was consulted, the feedback from consultees, how they 

were responded to and what alterations were made to the proposals as a 

result of consultation. 

Section 4 is a comparative matrix used to test how the PAC has met the ten 

standards set out in PAN 81. 

Section 5 provides a summary of the PAC for the Moorhouse Farmers 

Windfarm development proposals. 

Annex A includes a copy of the Proposal of Application Notice. 

Annex B provides a record of the information boards which were displayed at 

the Public Exhibition. 

Annex C is an example of the advert placed in the Glasgow and Eastwood 

Extra and the Ayrshire Post to advertise the Public Exhibition. 

Annex D is a copy of the Information Leaflet and maps which show the 

distribution area. 



2 PAC ACTIVITIES 


This chapter outlines the key information relating to the proposals and the 

consultation activities which were undertaken. 

2.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT 

2.2.1 Introduction 

Coriolis Energy LLP is developing proposals on behalf of Falck Renewables for 

Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm. The windfarm is based on an area of farmland to 

the west of Eaglesham and some eight kilometres (km) south west of Glasgow, 

between the M77 and the B764 (NGR NS 527 507) 6 (see Figure 2.1 7 ). 

The anticipated potential capacity of the windfarm is estimated to be 47.5 MW with 

19, 2-3 MW turbines. Coriolis Energy first began to research the site in 2007 and 

appointed a team of environmental consultants to undertake the environmental 

work for the project in April 2008. 

Falck Renewables Plc 8 , a subsidiary of the Falck Group, entered into a joint 

development agreement with Coriolis Energy in early 2007 in which Coriolis 

Energy agreed to develop projects for Falck and Falck agreed to fund 

development and to build and operate projects when consented. 

2.2.2 Key Components of the Proposals 

The key components of the proposals are: 

19 wind turbines; 

up to three permanent anemometer masts; 

a permanent access route into the site from the B764; 

access tracks and underground cabling within the site; 

an on-site control building including the electrical sub-station; and 

associated communications and other infrastructure. 

A plan of the proposals is shown in Figure 2.1. 

2.2.3 The Proposed Site 

The proposed site is set on the gentle hills between the A77 to the west, A726 to 

the north and B764 to the south east. Eastwood Golf Course lies to the north west 

of the site with Bonnyton Golf Course situated to the east. The village of 

Eaglesham is situated approximately 2km to the east of the site with the southern 

edges of Newton Mearns lying some 3km to the north of the site. 

The site area itself includes various scattered residential properties. There is one 

small area of woodland, Long Wood, adjacent the north east boundary of the site 

and other areas of plantation close by. There are various existing farm tracks 

throughout the site, which connect properties to fields and reservoirs. The site is 

drained by a series of small burns, some of which drain into Lochcraig Reservoir 

6 

NB This grid reference is an approximate centre point of the site 

7 

Please note that the windfarm layout that was consulted on (which is provided in Annex B - Information Board 7) 

differed to the final layout as shown in Figure 2.1 

8 

Falck Renewables builds and operates windfarms and is active in the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, and France, 

with approximately 320 MW in operation or construction. These generate electricity from a renewable source, the 

wind, and compared to conventional fuels provide a reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of approximately 

1 million tonnes annually 



and Bennan Loch. These water bodies are located centrally on the site and are 

used as public water supply reservoirs. 

The five farms involved in the project are: 

Shieldhill; 

South Moorhouse; 

North Moorhouse; 

East Moorhouse; and 

Bonnyton Moor. 

For more detailed information on the proposals refer to Chapter 3 of the 

Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm ES. 

2.3 ADDRESS OF THE SITE 

There is no postal address for the site. The proposed development is located to 

the west of Eaglesham and some eight km south west of Glasgow, between the 

M77 and the B764 (NGR NS 527 507) (see Figure 2.1). 

2.4 CONTACT DETAILS OF THE APPLICANT 9 

Applicant: 

Falck Renewables Plc. 

7/10 Beaumont Mews 

London 

W1G 6EB 

United Kingdom 

Agent: 

Coriolis Energy LLP 

11 Eden Place 

Carlisle 

CA3 9JQ 

01228 545 954 

harry.malyon@coriolis-energy.com 

2.5 SCREENING OPINION 

The proposals were identified as being classed as ‘major’ development (see 

Section 1.2). Therefore a requirement for PAC was assumed and a Screening 

Opinion was not sought from ERC. 

2.6 PROPOSAL OF APPLICATION NOTICE (PAN) 

A Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) was submitted on 29 June 2009 to: 

ERC Planning Department; 

Eaglesham and Waterfoot Community Council (CC) 10 ; 

Mearns Community Council; and 

Fenwick Community Council. 

9 Please note that in the Proposal of Application Notice the applicant was quoted as Coriolis Energy LLP and the 

agent as Natural Capital Ltd. Natural Capital Ltd are an environmental and sustainable development consultancy 

who have managed the environmental impact assessment of the proposals and the project consultation 

10 The proposed site is located within this CC area and is adjacent to both Mearns and Fenwick CC 



The PAN outlined the proposed approach to consultation and the PAC activities 

which would be undertaken to inform the developing design of the proposed 

development. The information which was provided in the PAN included: 

details of the applicant and agent; 

the postal address of the proposed site; 

a plan of the proposed site; 

a description of the proposed development and its status (national/ major 

application); 

whether the Council had adopted a screening opinion or the Scottish 

Government made a screening direction; 

an account of what consultation would take place, including: 

o what consultation would be undertaken (including details of public 

meeting); 

o the date of the consultation; and 

o who would be consulted. 

A copy of the PAN which was submitted to ERC and the CCs is provided in Annex 

A and is accompanied by: 

ERC confirmation of receipt of the PAN on 08 July 2009; 

a request from ERC for further information on 10 July 2009; 

response from the applicant on 15 July 2009 providing further information as 

requested by ERC on 10 July 2009; and 

confirmation from ERC on 22 July 2009 that the consultation proposals were 

satisfactory. 

The reference number provided by ERC for correspondence relating to the PAC is: 

2009/0406/PAN. 

2.7 PAC ACTIVITIES 

The minimum PAC requirements 11 for a ‘major’ application are: 

consult every CC whose area is within or adjoins the land where the proposed 

development is situated (see Number 1, Table 2.1); 

provide each relevant CC with the PAN (see Number 2, Table 2.1); 

hold at least one public event where comments can be made to the 

prospective applicant. The format of the public event should be as set out in 

the PAN or as prescribed by the planning authority. The event should be 

designed to encourage meaningful participation; be reasonably accessible; 

and if appropriate take place on a number of dates, and times and different 

places (see Number 3, Table 2.1); 

advertise the public event at least seven days in advance in the local 

newspaper to enable members of the CCs and public to attend the event 

(following the prescribed advert requirements) (see Number 4, Table 2.1); and 

collate a PAC Report in accordance with requirements to confirm that PAC has 

taken place in line with statutory minimum requirements and any further 

requirements set by the Planning Authority in response to the PAN (see 

Number 5, Table 2.1). 

The PAC activities which have been undertaken include the minimum PAC 

requirements as outlined above and two additional activities. These were: 

11 As outlined in Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2008 



the distribution of an information leaflet to some 11,000 properties in an area 

surrounding the proposed site (including, Newton Mearns, Waterfoot, 

Eaglesham and rural areas); and 

the development of a project website (Available: http://www.moorhousefarme 

rswindfarm.co.uk/) to enable access to up to date information on the proposals 

and to allow comments and feedback to the project team. 

The PAC activities which were proposed in the PAN (and as detailed above) are 

outlined in Table 2.1 with information on the additional PAC activities which were 

undertaken and evidence of how when, with whom and how all the consultation 

was completed. 



Table 2.1 Pre-Application Consultation Activities and Evidence of Completion 

A public exhibition was held on Tuesday 20 th October 2009 at the 

Eglinton Arms Hotel, Eaglesham from 11am to 8pm (details of 

the information boards which were displayed at the exhibition are 

included in Annex B and feedback and comments received from 

the community at the exhibition are included in Table 3.2) 

PAC Consultation When With Whom Form Evidence of Completion 

1. Consult every CC whose Ongoing CCs as follows: Letter/email with 

area is within or adjoins the 

Eaglesham and telephone 

site 

Waterfoot conversations as 

required and a 

Mearns 

presentation 

Fenwick (pending 12 All CCs were sent the proposal of application notice on 29 June 

2009 

All CCs were invited by letter (09 October 2009) to attend the 

public exhibition 

) at Eaglesham and Waterfoot CC (the CC area within which the 

Eaglesham and 

proposed site is located) has been consulted by telephone, email 

Waterfoot CC 

and face to face since the Scoping stage (October 2008) of the 

Meeting 

project (see Annex A of the ES) 

Mearns CC replied to the PAN and letter with some concerns – 

see Annex A of the ES 

For more detail on consultations with CCs see Annex A of this 

report and Annex A of the ES 

2. Provide each CC with PAN 29 June 2009 CCs as follows: Letter All CCs were sent the proposal of application notice on 29 June 

Eaglesham and 

2009 (see Annex A) 

Waterfoot 

Mearns 

Fenwick 

3. Public event: a manned 20 October 2009 Local neighbours, A manned interactive 

interactive drop in Public 

local communities drop in – members of 

Exhibition 

and community the project team 

councils (some 66 were available to 

people signed in at discuss the 

the public exhibition) proposals at the 


4. Advertisement of the At least 7 days in Local neighbours, Advert in local The public exhibition was advertised in: 

public event 

advance of the local communities newspaper (Glasgow 

o Glasgow South and Eastwood Extra on 8 October 

public exhibition and community South and Eastwood 

2009 and 15 October 2009; and 

(October 2009) councils 

Extra and Ayrshire 

o Ayrshire Post on 7 October 2009 

Post) 

An example of the advert is provided in Annex C 

12 th 

The presentation that was planned to take place on the 24 February 2010 was postponed due to weather conditions and may take place in the future if the CC require further information from the 

Project Developer 



PAC Consultation When With Whom Form Evidence of Completion 

5. Collate a PAC Report Throughout the PAC To be provided to Written report This PAC Report – see also Table 1.1 for evidence of how this 

process with ERC Planning including information report addresses ERC guidance on PAC Report content 

completed report to Department with the on who has been 

be submitted with planning application consulted, steps 

the planning and ES 

taken to comply with 

application and ES 

statutory 

requirements and 

those of ERC 

planning authority 

and description of 

how applicant has 

responded to 

comments and 

extent to which 

proposals have 

changed as a result 

of PAC 

Additional Consultation – End September/ Residents of Newton Information Leaflet An information leaflet describing the proposals and providing 

Distribution of Information early October 2009 Mearns, Waterfoot, 

information on how the community could comment on the 

Leaflet 

Eaglesham and rural 

proposals and information on the public exhibition were 

areas in and around 

distributed in an area near the proposed site. See Annex D for a 

the site – some 

copy of the information leaflet and maps showing the distribution 

11,000 properties 

area for the leaflet 

Additional Consultation – October 2009 - All interested parties Website (as http://www.moorhousefarmerswindfarm.co.uk/ 

Project Website 

ongoing 

advertised on 

A project website was set up so that consultees could access up 

information leaflet 

to date information on the proposals. The web address was 

and in all 

publicised in the information leaflet and at the public exhibition. 

consultation 

A comments and feedback facility was available on the website 

responses) 

to enable consultees to comment on the proposals. See Table 

3.2 for a copy of the comments and feedback received via the 

website comments facility 



3 CONSULTEE FEEDBACK AND ALTERATIONS TO PROPOSAL 


This chapter outlines: 

who was consulted; 

how the consultees views were recorded; 

provides a summary of the views of these consultees and how the applicant 

responded to them to allay any concerns and/ or objections which were raised; 

and 

provides references to where further information relating to consultee 

comments and queries can be found (mainly in the ES submitted with the 

planning application) 

3.2 WHO WAS CONSULTED? 

3.2.1 PAC Consultees 

Consultation activities including who was consulted with are outlined in Table 2.1. 

Consultation was as wide ranging and inclusive as possible. Those organisations 

and individuals who were consulted as part of the PAC are provided in Table 3.1 13 . 

Table 3.1 PAC Consultees 

PAC Consultees 

East Renfrewshire Council Planning Department 

Community Councils: 

o Eaglesham and Waterfoot CC 

o Mearns CC 

o Fenwick CC 

Member of Scottish Parliament (MSP) for Eastwood 

ERC Councillors 

East Ayrshire Councillors 

Landowners at: 

o Shieldhill; 

o South Moorhouse 

o North Moorhouse 

o East Moorhouse 

o Bonnyton Moor 

Local Community, including: 

o information leaflet to some 11,000 properties, including: 

Newton Mearns 

Waterfoot 

Eaglesham 

Rural areas in the site vicinity 

o advertisement of public exhibition in the Glasgow and Eastwood Extra 

and the Ayrshire Post 

o all those who attended the public exhibition on 20 th October 2009 

13 Please note that although contacted during PAC, not all organisations/ individuals listed responded to the 

request for consultation 



3.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Consultees 

As part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) many consultees were 

contacted including statutory consultees (ERC, Scottish Environment Protection 

Agency (SEPA), Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), Historic Scotland), key 

stakeholders, community groups, environmental stakeholders etc. Those 

organisations who were consulted as part of the EIA are included in Table 3.2 14 . 

All EIA related consultations are reported in the relevant sections of the ES and 

collated with an explanation of how the comments have been addressed in Annex 

A of the ES. 

Please note that there was often cross over between those people consulted as 

part of the EIA and as part of the PAC (for example, most EIA consultees were 

contacted by email and invited to attend the public exhibition). Cross references 

have been made in relevant areas of the text to explain where information has 

been reported (either in this PAC Report or the ES). 

Table 3.2 EIA Consultees 

EIA Consultees 

AMEY 

Architecture and Design Scotland 

Argyll and Bute Council 

British Aviation Authority (BAA) 

British Broadcasting Corporation 

Botanical Society of the British Isles 

Butterfly Conservation 

British Telecom 

Civil Aviation Authority Directorate of Airspace Policy 

Clyde Amphibian and Reptile Group 

Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park 

Connect 

CSS Spectrum Management Services Ltd 

Cycling Scotland 

Eaglesham and Waterfoot Community Council 

East Ayrshire Council 

East Dunbartonshire Council 

East Renfrewshire Council (various departments) 

Forestry Commission Scotland 

Glasgow City Council 

Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Strategic Development Plan Authority 

Glasgow Museums Resource Centre 

Glasgow Prestwick International Airport 

Health and Safety Executive 

Historic Scotland 

Hutchison 3G 

Inverclyde Council 

Inverclyde, East Renfrewshire and Renfrewshire Local Biodiversity Action Plan 

(LBAP ) Partnership 

Joint Radio Company 

Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park 

Mearns Community Council 

14 Please note that although contacted during EIA consultation, not all organisations/ individuals listed responded 

to the request for consultation 



EIA Consultees 

Ministry of Defence (Defence Estates) 

MLL Telecom 

National Farmers Union of Scotland (NFUS) 

NATS 

North Ayrshire Council 

Ofcom 

Ramblers Association (Scotland) 

Renfrewshire Council 

Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments (RCHAMS) 

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) 

Scottish Ambulance Service 

Scottish Badger Network 

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) 

Scottish Gas Networks 

Scottish Government Directorate for the Built Environment Planning Decisions 

Division 

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) 

Scottish Ornithologists Club (SOC) 

Scottish Water 

Scottish Wildlife Trust (SWT) 

South Ayrshire Council 

South Lanarkshire Council 

South Strathclyde Raptor Study Group 

Stirling Council 

Strathclyde Police 

Sustrans 

Thus Plc 

TRANSCO 

Transport Scotland 

Visit Scotland 

Vodafone 

West Dunbartonshire Council 

West of Scotland Archaeology Services (WOSAS) 

3.2.3 Landowner Consultation 

There are five landowners who are involved with the development of the proposals 

(see Section 2.2.3). These landowners have been closely involved with Coriolis 

Energy LLP and the project team throughout the development of the proposals. 

Coriolis Energy LLP has been in close telephone contact with the landowners and 

has met them on average once a month since 2007. 

The project team has had formal and informal meetings with the landowners and 

regular contact with them by telephone when arranging access to the proposed 

site and also during site visits. 

The landowners have been provided with information by telephone and letter as 

the project has developed. This has included information on what parts of the 

design development and EIA were being progressed and how this would affect 

them, an invite to the public exhibition and general updates on project progress. 



This allowed them the opportunity to provide input to and comments and feedback 

on the developing project proposals. 

Landowners were sent information updates by letter on the following dates: 

March 2009 

May 2009 

August 2009 

October 2009 

December 2009 

3.3 RECORD OF CONSULTEE VIEWS 

Comments and feedback from consultees were made : 

at the public exhibition: 

o in person (face to face); 

o via a Comments and Feedback Form; 

via the website comments and feedback facility; 

via the project email address, letter or on the phone. 

The comments and feedback were collated and recorded by the project team in 

two tables. The first, Table 3.1 provides a record of consultation via the website 

facility, email, letter and telephone and the second table, Table 3.2 provides a 

record of comments and feedback made at the public exhibition (see Photograph 

3.1 below). 

Both tables provide information on the type of consultee, the comments and 

feedback made, the action and/ or response taken by the project team and where 

further information can be found. A summary of if alterations were made to the 

proposals as a result of consultation is provided in Section 5 

Please note that specific names of consultees are not included, however this 

information is available to ERC should they require the information 

Figure 3.1: Public Exhibition 



Table 3.1 Record of PAC Comments and Feedback (via Website Facility, Email, Letter and Telephone) 

Consultee Consultee Comments and Feedback Action / Response Taken Further Information 

No. Type Date 

Received 

See Chapter 2: Need for 

the project, Objectives and 

Alternatives in the ES 

Strong objection to windfarms in general Response by email 01.10.09: 

Thank you for comments 

Note that all comments will be 

collated and reported in PAC 

Report and when submitted with 

the planning application will be 

available on project website 

Invite to public exhibition to discuss 

1. Email 29.09.09 East Ayrshire 

Homeowner 

Recreational interests have 

been considered in Chapter 

6: Land Use, Property and 

Agriculture in the ES 

concerns with project team 

Automatic response via website: 









Views from properties are 

assessed in Chapter 9: 

Landscape and Visual 

Assessment in the ES and 

recreational interests have 





2. Email 29.09.09 Consultee The leaflet only showed the central point of 

the windfarm and as yet there is no 

interactive map on the site. I would like to 

know the exact extent of the windfarm, 

whether Ballageich Hill is included in the 

area and where the proposed access road 

would be 

Having visited Whitelee windfarm at the 

weekend it is clear that a huge amount of 

work will be done on the site to create 

access to each turbine and as Ballageich is 

a local beauty spot I would like to know how 

much the hill itself would be affected. The 

area is much more used for recreational 

purposes than was the Whitelee windfarm on 

the opposite side of moor road and I would 

like to know whether access for walkers and 

cyclists would be included in the proposal, as 

it has been at Whitelee 

3. Email 29.09.09 Consultee I am very concerned about this development 

as it will not only ruin the view from my 

property but may also disturb my enjoyment 

of the local area as we ride out near to the 

proposed site 




No. Type Date 

Received 

recreational interests have 




proposed site Report and when submitted with 




See Consultee Number 4 in 

Table 3.2 (below) as this 

was from the same 

consultee 











4. Email 30.09.09 Consultee I feel that in this area there is a sufficiency of 

wind farms. No sooner has the M77 road 

works finished, when East Renfrewshire 

gave permission for the quarry at the Floak, 

and we have to suffer trundling trucks in front 

of our house, and now wind turbines in front 

of us. This is a rural area! Enough is 

enough. Lets hold on to what little is left of 

the green belt and not be swayed by the 

enticement of huge financial benefits for 

some 

Discussion with consultee at the public 

exhibition on 20.10.09 

Additional response sent by email on 

27.11.09 to answer questions raised in 

this email and by the consultee at the 

public exhibition on 20.10.09 (see 

Consultee Number 4 in Table 3.2 

The following information 

has been included in the 

ES: 

the interests of wildlife 

have been considered 

in Chapter 10: Ecology 

and Nature 

Conservation 

the Landscape and 

Visual Effects have 

been considered in 

below) 

Response by email 02.10.09: 









Strong objection to the proposed windfarm, 

for the following reasons: 

1. Windfarms KILL wildlife especially bats 

which are an endangered species 

2. Enough countryside has become ugly 

already in the area due to the erection of 

these turbines 

3. Turbines are not as successful as the 

Government informs us, just look at 

statistics from Holland. 

4. They create noise pollution 

5. Email 01.10.09 East Ayrshire 

home owner 




No. Type Date 

Received 

Chapter 9 

the project need has 

been identified in 

Chapter 2: Need for 

the Project, Objectives 

and Alternatives 

an assessment of 

noise and vibration in 

Chapter 12: Noise and 

Vibration 

socio economic effects 

in Chapter 16 





You may argue that this development will 

create employment but this employment is 

only temporary as previously demonstrated 

with Scottish Power renewables at Whitelee 

windfarm 










6. Email 01.10.09 Consultee I received your flyer and would agree with 

your plans albeit that the detailed map is not 

yet available on the website 

I think it would be beneficial if you would 

consider cycling/mountain biking in your 

plans. At the moment, people wishing to 

cycle at Whitelee tend to drive to Whitelee 

carrying their bikes or would need to cycle 

the Eaglesham Moor Road. While I'm happy 

doing this, it doesn't seem very family 

friendly. I think it's possible to cycle to 

Lochcraig Reservoir from Newton Mearns / 

Glasgow South via Bonnyton Moor/East 

Moorhouse or Titwood/North Moorhouse - 

however, I don't think there's a path/track to 

cycle from the reservoir to the B764 

I think it would be beneficial if there was a 

track from the reservoir to the B764 to link 

into Whitelee and possibly with some 

improvement to the tracks/minor roads back 

to Newton Mearns. This would link up your 

site, Whitelee and Newton Mearns/Glasgow 

south for cyclists in a more family friendly 

way and maybe encourage more cycling and 




No. Type Date 

Received 

Views have been assessed 

in Chapter 9: Landscape 

and Visual Assessment in 

the ES 










-- 

way and maybe encourage more cycling and 

less car usage through to Whitelee 

7. Email 02.10.09 Resident of We object to your proposed construction of 

Eaglesham 

Moorhouse Farmers windfarm 

We live in Eaglesham. This construction is 

an unnecessary profiteering exercise which 

would overload the area with turbines and 

destroy the views 

No amount of PR or quasi-green persuasion 

from your company will alter our 

position, which is common to those villagers 

whom we have so far canvassed, and should 

you submit plans to East Renfrewshire 

Council, we will rally opposition collectively 

through the village and the school 

8. Email 07.10.09 Consultee As an Eco School we are keen to teach our 

pupils about providing Energy in an 

environmentally friendly way. Can you tell 

me the costs involved in bringing a class and 

the age range and numbers you cater for 

9. Face to 08.10.09 Landowners Turbine Positions 

Face 

(involved with Wtg 17; too close to gas pipeline 

project) at South 

marker. May need to move NE? 

Moorhouse, East Wtgs 15,16 and 18; owner would like 

Moorhouse, 

them moved as far as possible to the 

Bonnyton Moor, 

east. Good ground to place turbines on 

North 

except for a degraded peat area to east 

Moorhouse, 

of Boshee Hill 

Shieldhill 

Roadlines 

Change roadline round Bennan Hill to 

avoid steep slope down to reservoir 

Keep roadline as far east as reasonable 

on East Moorhouse between wtg 15 and 

-- 



All welcome at the public exhibition 

Attached information leaflet for 

information about the proposals 

No direct response as landowners have 

had an input into the iterative design of 

the proposals throughout the project 

and regular contact with both Coriolis 

Energy LLP Project Developer and the 

project team 




No. Type Date 

Received 

18 

Consider siting road to Bonnyton side or 

march between Bonnyton and East 

Moorhouse (wtg 18 to 17) 

Roadline, avoiding Long Wood, 

identified to possible substation beside 

275kV line on Bonnyton 

Borrow Pits 

Road to possible substation may need 

borrow pit near Long Wood, or further 

north. 

May be suitable topping material on 

Bonnyton – Engineers to check stone on 

that property 

No response as no contact details 

provided 

Telecoms and other constraints 

Gas pipeline map provided across East 

Moorhouse, and contact at Scotia Gas 

Networks identified 

Archaeological constraints to west of 

Long Wood may be remains of WW2 

dummy aerodrome lights (concrete 

foundations) sited to draw bombers 

away from Glasgow 

Support windfarms as walkers are still 




welcome to the area 

10. Letter 12.10.09 Homeowner - 

Eaglesham 


The effects of noise are 

considered in Chapter 12: 

Noise and Vibration 








11. Email 12.10.09 Consultee Has been a member of Bonnyton Golf 

Club for 32 years and part of the appeal is 

the quiet, relaxing ambiance of the course 

Has no objection to the look of wind turbines 

but does worry about the constant noise, 

especially as it looks as if they will be very 

close to the course. 




No. Type Date 

Received 




An assessment of water 

quality and drainage is 

provided in Chapter 9 of the 

ES 



Note that in process of collecting 

information to inform the baseline 

of the EIA 

Invite to public exhibition 

Attached information leaflet 

Member of project team phoned in 

December 2010 to discuss the project 

further and explain about the proposals 

close to the course. 

Can you guarantee that the noise will not be 

heard from any part of the course? If not, 

then he objects strongly to the proposed site 

12. Email 12.10.09 Consultee She is senior lecturer in the Department of 

Geographical and Earth Sciences at 

Glasgow University. Her research group 

have been working on the water quality of 

the Whitelee Development since planning 

was approved in 2006. One of the rivers they 

are sampling joins downstream with one of 

the rivers she thinks draining the Moorhouse 

proposed site thus if monitoring is required of 

this site it may be useful for the project team 

to access data that delineates Whitelee 

impact from the proposed development 

Their data is still confidential, but it may 

benefit the EIA team to talk to Susan 

Waldron in more detail about what the 

proposals 

Attached a recent article for the Scotsman to 

provide further background as to her 

-- 

Response by Letter 04.12.09: 






available on the project website 

expertise 

Interested in windfarms partly because the 

first windmill she ever saw being built was 

used to generate electricity on Yell in the 

Shetland Isles in 1953 

If the proposals saves money for the farmers 

and provides for the Eaglesham population 

she would say ‘yes’ 

However, concerns are raised nowadays 

about structures such as electricity pylons, 

mobile phone masts and no doubt about 

wind turbines 

Residents in Eaglesham may be more 

13. Letter 11.10.09 Homeowner 

Newton Mearns 




No. Type Date 

Received 



ES: 

the need for the project 

has been considered in 

Chapter 2: Need for 

the Project, Objectives 

and Alternatives 




Chapter 9 (including 

several visualisations 

of the proposals) 

information on the 

lifespan of the 

proposals have been 

identified in Chapter 3: 

Project Description 


Thanked for comments 






1. Wind speeds at the proposed 

site are predicted to be sufficient to 

produce enough power for a viable 

windfarm 

2. As part of the EIA process the 

impacts of construction and 

operation would be assessed. 

Further information will be available 

in the ES which will be submitted 

with the planning application 

3. Natural Capital Ltd has been 

concerned than she is as they are located 

closer to the proposals 

She notes that in general people are afraid 

of change and thinks that people are 

mistaken in thinking that the windfarms 

cause health problems 

Agrees that some wildlife may be frightened 

away but that using Shetland as an example, 

oil exploration has not frightened the wildlife 

off and that wildlife can adjust to humans 

being on earth 

She wrote to Scottish Power a few months 

ago for some photos of Whitelee to send to a 

charity in Zambia where they have power 

cuts every day. 

She notes that perhaps she should have 

asked us for photos 

14. Email 21.10.09 Consultee I would like to comment on and invite your 

response ref the Moorhouse Farmers 

Windfarm Proposal following the public 

meeting in Eglinton Arms Hotel on 20th 

October 2009 

1. A 40 MW output is miniscule in terms of 

national demand and raises serious 

questions about the viability of this 

operation. In practice, the site will 

generate about 30% capacity, or 

around 15MW. 

2. The construction of such a windfarm will 

cause disproportionate disturbance and 

despoliation of the landscape. 

3. The suspicion is engendered that this 

proposal masks future expansion to a 

level that will make it financially viable 

with, by definition, further disturbance 

and despoliation. 




No. Type Date 

Received 

Project Description 

traffic and access 

effects are assessed in 

Chapter 4: Traffic and 

Access 

commissioned to assess the 

current proposals 

4. The lifespan of this windfarm 

development would be likely to be 

some 25 years. Decommissioning 

of the windfarm site would take 

place once the site ceases 

operation. A financial sum or bond 

would be provided by windfarm 

developers for the 

decommissioning and restoration 

works. 

5. The details of the project team 

and the EIA methodology will be 

provided in the ES. As stated in 

leaflet the visualisations shown are 

indicative and the final position of 

turbines may change. The 

visualisations have been generated 

using a computer model to help 

understand what the development 

might look like. Further updated 

visualisations will be included in the 

ES 

The draft access track layout of the 

proposal as consulted on at the 

public exhibition in October 2009 is 

now available on the website 

6. A location for some 

infrastructure, such as the substation, 

has not yet been identified 

but once decided will be assessed 

in the EIA and reported in the ES. 

The timeframe for construction of 

the access roads, infrastructure 

and despoliation. 

4. The lifespan of windfarms is around 

twenty years, yet there appears to be no 

mention of plans to restore the 

landscape to its present natural wild 

state. How you will address this problem 

is a question to which an answer is 

urgently requested. 

5. I am particularly interested in the photo 

montages which were produced to 

support this proposal and which were 

published in your promotional literature. 

To obviate any suggest ion of them 

being misleading, will you please outline 

(a) The software used to produce them 

(b) The computer programming model 

used (c) The degree to which turbine 

positioning will change in the plans (d) 

The company contracted to undertake 

the photography and montage work and 

the costs involved. 

6. What is not shown, nor mentioned, is 

the location, scale and timeframe of the 

construction of access roads and 

infrastructure. Please address this 

issue. 

The above constitute some of my 

observations on this proposal and your reply 

will influence the degree to which I will place 

objections before the planning authorities 




No. Type Date 

Received 

and turbines is likely to be some 

nine months. 

As above As above 

Information on traffic and 

access effects are 

assessed in Chapter 4: 

Traffic and Access of the 

ES and information about 

the Community Fund are 

provided in Chapter 16: 

Socio Economic Effects in 

the ES 








In response to concerns about 

construction traffic passing through 

Eaglesham, as part of the EIA 

process the effects of construction 

and operational traffic are 

assessed and mitigation developed 

to reduce any significant effects. 

Further information will be available 

in the ES which will be submitted 


As part of this development the 

developers (Falck) will make 

annual community benefit 

payments to a Community Fund. 

This fund can make payments to 

community projects, often acting as 

a seed fund to match finance 

where this is needed to access 

public funds. There will also be an 

opportunity to invest in the 

windfarm. Falck's practice is to 

contract with Energy4All, who will 

set up a co-operative, seeking 

investment from local people. 

Email 19.11.09 Consultee Copy of the first letter (received by email 

21.10.09) asking for comment 

15. Email 22.10.09 Homeowner No construction traffic should be allowed to 

Eaglesham 

use the B764 through the village 

All operatives should be encouraged to use 

the Moor Road from the M/A 77 at Kingswell 

All monies should be paid to the Community 

Council and tied up so that the local Council; 

cannot “get their hands on it” 

Beware of Barrack Room Lawyers trained in 

Philadelphia!! 

The Council should not be a party to the 

Trust which should be solely responsible for 

allocating the money 

The local Community Council must have a 

representative on the Trust and the legal 

back ground on Trustee behaviour and 

responsibility must be fully explained 

I enclose details of a Guidance note that was 

issued by Scottish Power about “ guidance in 

good Project Management 

Your people will probably know this already 

but I hope the reminder may be of use and 

not taken amiss 




No. Type Date 

Received 

-- 

Income accrues to the co-operative 

from the revenue stream of the 

wind farm, in proportion to the 

money raised in the public offer 

16. Email 25.10.09 Consultee Website is not working Responded by email 27.10.09 advising 

that website was now working 

Automatic response via website 



ES: 

Information on the 

planning and policy 

framework and 

clarification that the 

proposals are not on 

greenbelt land in 

Chapter 5: Planning 

and Policy 

Recreational interests 

have been considered 

in Chapter 6: Land 

Use, Property and 

Agriculture 

An assessment on 

ecology and nature 

conservation is 

provided in Chapter 10: 

Ecology and Nature 

Conservation 




Chapter 9 

information on traffic 

and access is included 

in Chapter 4: Traffic 

and Access 

Discussion with consultee at the public 

exhibition on 20.10.09 

Coriolis Energy LLP Project Developer 

met with consultee in person on 

10.12.09 to discuss the proposals (see 

consultee response number 25 in Table 

3.2 below) 

17. Email 28.10.09 Consultee As an extremely "close" resident to the 

proposed new Moorhouse windfarm, I am 

absolutely astounded that this development 

is even being considered! 

I have lived here for 12 years and bought the 

property because of the beautifully unspoilt 

countryside and location of the property...as 

well as that, it is Greenbelt land and no 

building would be allowed and so my 

children could grow up in the countryside 

I have brought my two daughters into this 

world here and they love playing outside and 

walking up at the reservoirs with the dog. 

This will not be able to happen any more 

because of the roads access and vehicles 

and I am so disheartened by that thought 

I also must bring to attention the local wildlife 

from deer to badgers, the birds and the 

ground insects (newts, toads, etc) which at 

the moment both graze in fields around us 

and live in our garden in the summer 

months! 

I do not wish to open my curtains on 3 sides 

of my house and look out to see my currently 

unspoilt views marred by these ugly looking 

monstrosities! A total disregard for local life 

and lives... 

My final key point is the current market value 

of my home. Having had it valued no sooner 

that 2 months ago we were over the moon 




No. Type Date 

Received 

and Access 

See consultee response 

number 25 in Table 3.2 

(below) as this was from 

the same consultee 

that 2 months ago we were over the moon 

with the growth even in today’s market 

conditions, however this was before any 

definitive news on the windfarm...If 50 

people came to view our house then 50 out 

of 50 would be in "awe" of the views as it 

stands today. If this windfarm goes ahead 

then the same 50 people would be 

commenting on how lovely the house was 

but how awful the view would be. Therefore 

significantly affecting my future house value 

too. 

For the past 5 years we have put up with the 

trucks going to and from the quarry at The 

Floak. The proposal is that of a quarry for 

local stone to be used for this windfarm...is it 

going to be the same thing?...Trucks going 

to and from here at ridiculously dangerous 

speeds, putting my kids at risk whilst playing 

outside? 

Currently I can see the propellers of the 

windmills at what is being described as the 

largest windfarm in Europe. Why is there 

then the need for this one in such close 

proximity not only to Whitelee but to my 

home? 

In the past three years two new houses have 

been approved to be built and now the same 

family are proposing a windfarm...in an area 

protected by building rules and regulations 

how is this possible? Why is permission 

being given to said projects when the area 

should be being conserved? 



ES: 

This was an email sent after Coriolis 

Energy LLP Project Developer met with 

consultee on 10.12.09 (see Consultee 

18. Email 10.12.09 Consultee Thanks for taking the time to see us. Here is 

our contribution to the disturbance the 




No. Type Date 

Received 

ES: 

information on traffic 

and access is included 

in Chapter 4: Traffic 

and Access 

the effects of noise 

are considered in 

Chapter 12: Noise and 

Vibration 

consultee on 10.12.09 (see Consultee 

Number 24 in Table 3.4 below) 

See Consultee Number 24 

in Table 3.2 (below) as this 

was from the same 

consultee 

children suffered during Whitelee 

development 

Being the mother of 4 children twins at 7 

years old a girl aged 4 and a boy aged 3 my 

children were subjected to sleep deprivation. 

Due to the large size of the turbines a police 

escort is needed thus flashing lights appear 

then the noise of the lorry transporters wake 

everybody. Once my 4 and 3 year old see 

the flashing lights they become almost 

hysterical One morning at 3 am my little girl 

looked out the window and thought aliens 

were going to take her away thus making it 

impossible for her to go back to sleep 

My twins both received notes in their 

homework diary that they seemed tired in 

class. This is due to firstly being awoken by 

the turbines and secondly listening to their 

younger siblings crying. I find this 

unacceptable to subject children to this if this 

was to happen in a place where there were 

several families with young children there 

would be an uproar 

If these wind turbines must pass a family 

house when children sleep I feel we as a 

family are entitled to triple glazing windows 

and black out blinds for the windows so my 

children are not woken. It would also be 

useful to know what nights the wind turbines 

will pass our house 

There is also the issue of increased traffic 

passing our property. We stay in a rural 

setting when Whitelee was in development 

there was an increased amount of lorries 

passing her house. We would like the trees 




No. Type Date 

Received 

-- 

Coriolis LLP Project Developer 

discussed at meeting of 10.12.09 and 

suggested would remain in contact in 

the future 

cut or removed to make vision easier leaving 

our property 

We would like you to consider improving the 

kids play area to the front of the house by 

landscaping and tree planting to shield traffic 

noise 

19. Meeting 10.12.09 Consultee Has plans for eco-house beside trout farm 

lake south of Moor Road. Problems with 

electric supply cost 

Suggest that local contractor available to do 

civils work and would not object to the 

Further information on the 

proposals will be provided 

in the ES 


met with consultee (Golf Club) in person 

on 10.11.09 to discuss the proposals 

proposals 

Following the public exhibition of 20.10.09 the 

Golf Club made contact with Coriolis Energy LLP 

Project Developer to request a meeting/ 

presentation 

20. Email Ongoing Nearby Golf Club 

1 

Latest proposed windfarm layout was 

delivered by hand to the Golf Club on 

10.12.09 

Response to queries from Golf Club 

(received 15.12.09) sent by email on 

07.01.10: 

1. Scoping Report was submitted to 

ERC Planning Department in 

September 2008. A Scoping Opinion 

Letter was received from ERC Roads, 

Planning and Transportation Service on 

26 November 2008. 

2. Planning to submit the application to 

the ERC Roads, Planning and 

Transportation Service early in 2010. 

3. In the design layout provided by 

Project Developer to the Golf Club in 

early December 2009, which may be 

subject to change, the nearest turbine is 

Email of 15.12.09 

1 When will the scoping opinion be applied for 

and when will it be published? 

2 When do you plan to make your application to 

the planning authority? 

3 How close to the golf course will the nearest 

turbines be? 

4 What turbines will you be using? Will they be 

unnamed, so as to give you a competitive 

advantage when bidding or are you naming 

candidate turbines now? What will their overall 

height be? 

5 What is the precise intended layout? 

6 Noise is evident from many windfarms at 

±750m. May we see your noise predictions? 

7 Have you carried out bird and wildlife studies? 

If so can we see them, and if not are you going to 

do so? 




No. Type Date 

Received 

subject to change, the nearest turbine is 

approximately 1km away from the 

boundary of Bonnyton Golf Club 

4.The proposed turbines have not yet 

been confirmed. It is likely that there 

overall height (to blade tip) would be 

126.5 metres. 

5.The EIA is ongoing and the precise 

layout is not yet fully tied down. It will 

be similar to the layout you have with 

some small changes. 

6.Noise predictions and assessment are 

being undertaken following recognised 

best practice methodology. The 

methodology, baseline information and 

findings of the assessment including 

how noise constraints have fed into the 

developing design will be included in 

the ES which will be submitted with the 

planning application to ERC. The ES 

will be available to the public at that 

time. 

7.Bird and other protected species 

surveys and an assessment of effects 

have been undertaken. The findings of 

the surveys and the assessment will be 

included in the ES which will be 

submitted with the planning application 

to ERC. 

8. Information on the need for the 

project will be included in the ES which 

will be submitted with the planning 

application to ERC. 

9.The grid connection has not yet been 

finalised and separate consents would 

8 Scotland has already met its 2010 targets, and 

is close to meeting its 2020 targets. How do you 

justify this windfarm in an area where there is so 

much other wind power? 

9 Where is your grid connection going to be and 

how will the power get there? 

10 Who is on your team of consultants? 

11 A windfarm is an uneasy neighbour, and at 

the distances proposed is bound to have a 

dominating and pervasive effect on the amenity 

of the club. Local Plan policies protect not only 

residential amenity, but also recreational amenity. 

How do you plan to get around the policies and 

justify this construction in this location, so close 

not only to the club, but to a number of 

residences? 

12 Where will access to the site be taken from? I 

understand 100-ton cranes and other very heavy 

equipment is required, and tracks will have to be 

formed to take them to site. What route will there 

tracks take? 

13 Have you done hydrology/geophysical 

studies to try to predict the ground conditions? Is 

there peat on the site, and if so will it be 

disturbed? 

14 The paperwork says this is a good site 

because it is near the central belt. Is it not the 

case that windfarms feed into the grid for all of 

the UK and it doesn't matter where they are? 

Electricity is not consumed locally, so that factor 

is irrelevant. 

15 Do you agree that there will be cumulative 

impact with Whitelee? Is it Falck's position that 

since there are so many turbines at Whitelee 

(recently extended) that a few more won't make 




No. Type Date 

Received 

be obtained if required. 

10. Our team includes engineers and 

environmental consultants. Details of 

the team will be included in the ES 

which will be submitted with the 

planning application to ERC. 

11.Information on planning policy and 

how the development complies will be 

included in the ES which will be 

submitted with the planning application 

to ERC. The ES will also include a 

landscape and visual assessment which 

will include an assessment from sample 

viewpoints. 

12.Access to the site is proposed at 

NGR NS 490 524. Details of the 

developing access track layout is 

available on the website 

www.moorhousefarmerswindfarm.co.uk. 

The track layout is under development 

and may be subject to change as the 

EIA is undertaken. The website will be 

updated when the design is finalised. 

Information and a detailed layout will 

also be included in the ES 

13.Relevant studies to inform the EIA 

and design of the windfarm have been 

undertaken and information on these 

will be included in the ES 

14.Information on the need for the 

project and the chosen site will be 

included in the ES 

15.Cumulative impacts with proposed 

windfarms have been assessed as part 

of the EIA and the findings will be 

any difference? 

16 Are there any plans for the extension of this 

windfarm if it is built, as has happened in so 

many places in Scotland? 




No. Type Date 

Received 

included in the Environmental 

Statement which will be submitted with 

the planning application to ERC. The 

assessment will also take account of 

the Whitelee Windfarm as part of the 

current baseline against which the 

proposals will be assessed. 

16.We are considering a single 

proposal at this stage. Please note that 

all comments received will be reported 

(not specifically attributed) in a PAC 

Report but they are not representations 

to the planning authority. When the 

application is submitted there will be an 

opportunity to make representations on 

that application to the Roads, Planning 

and Transportation Service at ERC. 

The PAC Report will be submitted with 

the planning application in early 2010. 

This report will include how any 

comments received during the preapplication 

consultation have 

been addressed and fed into the 

developing design of the windfarm. A 

copy of the report will be available on 

the website once it is finalised. 

Ongoing correspondence between 


and the Golf Club representative 

-- 

See also Consultee Number 12 in 

Table 3.2 below 

Most up to date layout of the proposed 

development sent by email and post on 

Communication between Coriolis Energy LLP 

Project Developer and the Golf Club about 

21. Email 05.02.10 Nearby Golf Club 

2 




No. Type Date 

Received 

08.02.10 

possibility of meeting/ presentation to the 

members of the Golf Club in February 2010 

Presentation to the Golf Club on 

23.02.10 



Table 3.2 Record of PAC Comments and Feedback (received at the public exhibition) 

This table contains the comments and feedback received at the public exhibition on the 20 th October 2009 at the Eglinton Arms Hotel, 

Eaglesham. Comments received via the comments and feedback form are recorded below in plain text and comments received face-to-face 

are recorded below in italicised text. 

No. Consultee Consultee Comments and Feedback Action/ Response Taken Further Information 

1 Consultee 

Not a fan of windfarms 

Response to email received from See Consultee Number 15 in Table 

Waterfoot 

Do not think they are all that efficient 

consultee on 22.10.09 and 3.1 above 

Do not trust the Council will hand over any money to inclusion of reference to comments 

the village 

received at public exhibition (see 

Consultee Number 15 in Table 3.1 

above) 

2 Consultee 

Wants a visual impact image from G77 6RP (wireline Coriolis Energy LLP Project The following information has been 

Renfrewshire 

and visualisation) 

Developer met with consultee in included in the ES: 

Will affect her natural country views as they will see all person on 10.12.09 to discuss the the Landscape and Visual 

19 turbines 

proposals: 

Effects have been considered 

Will impact on flora, fauna, wildlife etc on Bonnyton Consultee showed Project in Chapter 9 (including several 

Moors which is a very special place 

Developer view from garden visualisations of the 

Will devalue property (first the M77, then a dam and and requested a wireline/ proposals) 

now a windfarm) 

photomontage 

the effects on flora, fauna, 

Already exposed to Whitelee 

Consultee commented that wildlife etc have been 

What happens in 25 years time? 

view would be spoiled by assessed in Chapter 10: 

Ballageich Hill will be dwarfed 

proposals 

Ecology and Nature 

Please do not touch tree planted in memory of our late She would like a follow up Conservation 

son on Mr Barr’s land 

meeting 

information on the lifespan of 

Would like a copy of development and plan process 

the proposals have been 

slide and any other useful information 

A wireline/ visualisation will be identified in Chapter 3: Project 

provided to the consultee following Description 

submission of the planning 

application to ERC 

3 Consultee 

Will be sending on comments after some more thought Response planned to be sent The Landscape and Visual Effects 

Mearnskirk 

The proposals would impact on view and walking when additional comments from of the proposals have been 

amenity in the area 

consultee received 

considered in Chapter 9 (including 

She will see all the turbines from her house 

several visualisations of the 

Impact on house value 

proposals) of the ES. Recreational 

interests have been considered in 




Chapter 6: Land Use, Property and 

Agriculture of the ES 

The following information has been 

included in the ES: 

the Landscape and Visual 

Effects have been considered 

in Chapter 9 (including several 

visualisations of the 

proposals) 

Information on the planning 

and policy framework and 

clarification that the proposals 

are not on greenbelt land in 

Chapter 5: Planning and 

Policy 

Information about the 

Community Fund are provided 

in Chapter 16: Socio 

Economic Effects in the ES 

Information on traffic and 

access is included in Chapter 

4: Traffic and Access 

Response sent by email on 

27.11.09 to answer questions 

raised in email of 30.09.09 (see 

Consultee Number 4 in Table 3.1, 

above) and to comments received 

at the public exhibition. Response 

included: 




Report and when submitted 


will be available on project 

website 

In direct response to issues 

raised by consultee in email of 

30.09.09 (italics): 

This is possibly the worst thing I have seen and I will 

oppose this 

Did not receive a detailed reply to the email she sent 

to Moorhouse Farmers email address 

How will we prevent maintenance vehicles from using 

the A77 instead of the M77 – Patterson’s Quarry 

lorries come past the house even thought they are not 

meant to 

Notes that the history of the site was originally two 

farmers together 

Very anti the proposals 

Whitelee very big (too big) don’t want more 

Traffic implications? 

Don’t build here 

Immoral - too close 

Quality of life comes second to financial gain 

No environmental morality 

4 Consultee 

Loganskirk 

I feel that in this area there is a 

sufficiency of wind farms. 

Concern noted and EIA will 

consider the impacts of the 

proposals and the cumulative 

landscape and visual and 

other environmental effects 

with windfarms within 60 

kilometres (km) of the 

proposals. Further information 

will be available in the 

Environmental Statement 

which will be submitted with 

the planning application. 

No sooner has the M77 road works 

finished, when East Renfrewshire 

gave permission for the quarry at 

the Floak, and we have to suffer 




the Floak, and we have to suffer 

trundling trucks in front of our 

house, and now wind turbines in 

front of us. This is a rural area! 

Enough is enough. Lets hold on to 

what little is left of the green belt 

and not be swayed by the 

enticement of huge financial 

benefits for some 

As part of EIA the effects of 

construction and operational 

traffic are assessed and 

mitigation developed to reduce 

any significant adverse 

effects. Also as part of the 

EIA process a landscape and 

visual assessment is 

undertaken. As part of the 

visual assessment viewpoints 

in the area surrounding the 

site will be selected as 

representative of the range of 

views and types of viewer 

likely to be affected by the 

project. Once the design is 

finalised it would be possible 

to create a wireline diagram to 

demonstrate how much of the 

windfarm would be visible 

from your property. 

The north east corner of the 

site is zoned in the East 

Renfrewshire Local Plan 

under Policy E2 as Greenbelt. 

We have sited proposed 

turbines and access tracks 

outwith this area. 




As part of this development 

the developers, Falck 

Renewables, will make annual 

community benefit payments 

to a Community Fund. This 

fund can make payments to 

community projects, often 

acting as a seed fund to match 

finance where this is needed 

to access public funds. There 

will also be an opportunity to 

invest in the windfarm. Falck's 

practice is to contract with 

Energy4All, who will set up a 

co-operative, seeking 


Income accrues to the cooperative 

from the revenue 

stream of the wind farm, in 

proportion to the money raised 

in the public offer. 

Coriolis Energy LLP Project 

Developer met with consultee in 

person on 10.12.09 to discuss the 

proposals: 

Consultee asked for wirelines 

from their property 

Expressed dislike for the 

proposals 

Is worried about value of their 

property 

Stated that the road to South 

Moorhouse is quiet but 

already dangerous and wants 

to know how construction 

traffic would be controlled 




A wireline/ visualisation will be 

provided to the consultee following 



No response -- 

Good exhibition with pleasant staff 

All his questions were answered 

5 Consultee 

Eaglesham 



information about the 



Economic Effects in the ES 

information on traffic and 



an assessment of effects on 


conservation is provided in 

Chapter 10: Ecology and 

Nature Conservation 

Response to consultee by phone 

on 13.11.09 to arrange 

presentation/ meeting with CC 

Good luck with the planning application 

Operation of community fund – they think that it should 

be under trust fund control 

Can we have a trust fund run by the community 

council, we are more than capable of doing it 

Avoid the traffic through the village – there were 

difficulties with the workforce using Eaglesham as a 

throughway to get to work 

Can provision be made in the construction contract to 

avoid workforce going through the village or 

encourage other routes and/ or car sharing 

Please avoid cutting down any trees as these are 

useful for carbon capture 

Deer hare rabbits at the Golf Club 

Marsh curlers 

New houses – drainage issues 

Watch the wildlife as there is a lot in the area 

Personally has no objection to windfarms 

The site will only be visible to a few houses 

Does not expect any noise as they will be too far away 

Please contact her to arrange a meeting with the 

Community Council 

6 Eaglesham and 

Waterfoot CC 

Copy of most up to date layout 

sent to CC on 21.02.10 

A presentation by Coriolis Energy 

LLP Project Developer providing 

information on the proposals and 

community fund was arranged for 

the CC Meeting of 24.02.10 but 

was cancelled due to weather 

conditions. The Project Developer 

sent an email outlining information 

about community benefits on 

25.02.10: 

Commitment that Coriolis LLP 

would make an appropriate 

and meaningful contribution 

to the host community from 

the profits of the windfarm 

Will provide an annual indexlinked 

community benefit of 

£2000 per MW installed. This 

will be subject to consent and 

build, and will apply for the 

life of the project 

Does not wish to propose 




how the fund should be 

divided with the host 

communities – ERC would be 

prepared to assist in 

administration 

Noted Falck Renewables 

opportunity through 

Energy4All for individual 

investment in the profit 

stream from a windfarm 

An agreement was reached that the 

Project Developer would present to 

the CC in the future if requested by 

the CC and that they would remain 

-- 

The Landscape and Visual Effects 

have been considered in Chapter 9 

(including several visualisations of 

the proposals) of the ES 

in contact 

Information sent on 11.03.10 by 

email 

Letter sent by post 04.12.09: 






will be available on project 

website 

As part of the EIA a landscape 

and visual assessment is 

undertaken. As part of the 

visual assessment viewpoints 

in the area surrounding the 

site will be selected as 

representative of the range of 

views and types of viewer 

likely to be affected by the 

project. Once the design is 

finalised it would be possible 

8 Consultee Please send information about Falck and Coriolis – 

who they are and details about existing wind farms 

9 Consultee 

Serious concern at the view from his address 

Newton Mearns 

Some concern about change to view at property (north 

of M77 on A77 directly north of golf course by ‘193’ on 

OS map) 

Can see top of 14 Whitelee turbines in view to south at 

present 




to create an indicative wireline 

diagram to demonstrate how 

much of the windfarm would 

be visible from your property. 

Further information will be 

available in the ES which will 

be submitted with the planning 

application. 





No response -- 

Good exhibition and very informative 

Thank you 

Please provide copy of all maps and notes on same 

scale as displayed at the public exhibition – the map 

on the information leaflet seems deliberately 

misleading 

Willing to allow noise readings to be taken from their 

property 

Primary concerns are proximity of windmills, noise and 

shadow flicker effect and impact on property – is any 

direct compensation available to alleviate these 

concerns? 

Further direct contact would be appreciated at all 

stages of the process 

Langlee residents: Turbines 8 and 17 are closer than 

thought 

There are only two properties at Langlee – one farm 

and one cottage (our map show three) 

10 Consultee 

Newton Mearns 

11 Consultee 

Newton Mearns 

Copies of the maps, notes, 

information etc displayed at the 

public exhibition are available on 

the project website 

(www.moorhousefarmerswindfarm. 

co.uk) and in Annex B). The 

Landscape and Visual Effects have 

been considered in Chapter 9 


the proposals) of the ES. Noise is 

assessed in Chapter 12: Noise and 

Vibration of the ES 




proposals and provide the 

consultee with up to date layouts of 

the proposals: 

They offered to be a noise 

metering location 

They would like a wireline 

from their house 

Consultee sent email on 10.12.09 

thanking for visit and stating that 

main concern is the likely reduction 

in the value of their property due to 

visual and noise impacts of the 

proposals 

Response by email 10.12.09 to 

consultee stating that their 

concerns have been taken on board 

and they will be reported in the PAC 




Report 





A wireline/ visualisation and a copy 

of the PAC Report will be provided 

to the consultee following 






proposals (see also Consultee 

Number 20 in Table 3.1, above – 

although this communication was 

with a different consultee they were 

also representing the interest of 

Bonnyton Golf Course) 







will be available on the project 

website 

Once the design is finalised it 

would be possible to create an 

indicative wireline diagram to 




Please examine the feasibility of turbine placement in 

other areas as discussed 

Bonnyton Golf Course-concerned about changes in 

amenity 

12 Consultee 

Eaglesham 





Please could you make me a visualisation of the view 

of the windfarm from my property 

13 Consultee 

Eaglesham 









Further destruction of the environment in the area 

which has already been affected by Whitelee windfarm 

14 Consultee 

Eaglesham 




The proposal will destroy the views from Ballageich Note that all comments will be an assessment of cumulative 

and coupled with the height of the turbines, the collated and reported in PAC effects is provided in each 

turbines will be visible for many miles in all directions Report and when submitted chapter of the ES 

Considered a real selling point would be if there was with the planning application the Landscape and Visual 

good access across the site to all users including will be available on the project Effects have been considered 

those with disabilities. 

website 


This would provide Hazeldean/Newton Mearns with a Once the design is finalised it visualisations of the 

safe off-road link across to Whitelee to be able to take would be possible to create an proposals) of the ES 

advantage of the path network. 

indicative wireline diagram to recreational interests have 

The main noise from Whitelee is the whine of the demonstrate how much of the been considered in Chapter 6: 

generators 

windfarm would be visible Land Use, Property and 

What happens if there is an earthquake as there have from your property. 

Agriculture 

been some tremors in the area and concerned over 


effect of earthquake on the large turbine structures A wireline/ visualisation will be access is included in Chapter 

Do we measure noise levels from pathways in the area provided to the consultee following 4: Traffic and Access 

to identify effect on recreational user of the area submission of the planning the effects of noise are 




15 Consultee 

Would like information re: proposals for Trust Fund Response by email 04.12.09: Information about the Community 

Eaglesham 

Thanked for comments Fund are provided in Chapter 16: 

Note that all comments will be Socio Economic Effects in the ES 





website 

In response to your request for 

information about Trust Fund 

proposals, as part of this 

development the developers, 

Falck Renewables, will make 


payments to a Community 

Fund. This fund can make 

payments to community 

projects, often acting as a 

seed fund to match finance 




where this is needed to 

access public funds. There 















in the public offer 

Response by letter 08.12.09: 







website 

As part of the EIA process a 

landscape and visual 

assessment is undertaken. As 

part of the visual assessment 

viewpoints in the area 

surrounding the site will be 

selected as representative of 

the range of views and types 

of viewer likely to be affected 

by the project. Once the 

design is finalised it would be 

possible to create an 





Would like wireline visualisation from nearby property 

– West Titwood 

Concern about visual change 

Concern about cumulative effects of a succession of 

projects- M77; Whitelee; the dam and now this 

proposal 

16 Consultee 

Newton Mearns 



















website 

In response to your queries 

about the photomontages, 

visualisations and GIS 

software, at this stage we 

would comment that the 

details of the project team and 

the Environmental Impact 

Assessment (EIA) 

methodology will be provided 

in the Environmental 

Statement which will be 

submitted with the planning 

application. As stated in our 

leaflet (Sept 2009) our 

visualisations are 

indicative and the final 

position of turbines may 

change. The visualisations 

were generated using a 

computer model to help 

understand what the 

development might look like. 

Further updated visualisations 

will be included in the 

Could you please send information on how 

photomontages have been made and which company 

did it 

What computer model was used to create the 

visualisations and what GIS software 

17 Consultee 

Eaglesham 






Information about the Community 

Fund are provided in Chapter 16: 

Socio Economic Effects in the ES 









website 

In response to your request for 

information about Community 

Fund proposals, as part of this 

development the developers, 

Falck Renewables, will make 


payments to a Community 

Fund. This fund can make 

payments to community 

projects, often acting as a 

seed fund to match finance 

where this is needed to 

access public funds. There 











in the public offer. 

Response by letter 04.12.09: 


Concern about the distribution of the community fund 

Want to make sure that the money goes to the local 

community and not to East Renfrewshire Council to 

disperse 

18 Consultee 

Eaglesham 

Information on traffic and access is 

included in Chapter 4: Traffic and 

Access of the ES 

Hopes that construction traffic will always enter from 

Kilmarnock and off the A77 and not go through the 

19 Consultee 

Eaglesham 




village of Eaglesham Note that all comments will be Access of the ES 





website 

In response to your concerns 

about construction traffic 

passing through the village of 

Eaglesham, at this stage we 

would comment that as part of 

the EIA process the effects of 

construction and operational 

traffic are assessed and 

mitigation developed to reduce 

any significant adverse 

effects. Further information 

will be available in the 



the planning application 

20 Consultee 

Has gone through 3 years of opposing Whitelee Response by letter 04.12.09: The following information has been 

Eaglesham 

windfarm 

Thanked for comments included in the ES: 

Is very disappointed to find yet another site proposed Note that all comments will be an assessment of cumulative 

The Moor has been decimated and the forest is almost collated and reported in PAC effects is provided in each 

surrounded by turbines 

Report and when submitted chapter of the ES 

On some still days the turbines do not even produce with the planning application the Landscape and Visual 

wind 

will be available on the project Effects have been considered 

Complains that property has devalued 

website 


Access via Carrot Farm to Whitelee for pedestrians is In response to your concerns visualisations of the 

poor as no good path 

about the proposals, at this proposals) of the ES 

Property at Carrot Farm: at present can hear but not stage we would comment that 

see Whitelee-would like to know more about proposed the Environmental Impact 

change to view 

Assessment (EIA) of the 

proposals will consider not 

only the impacts of the 

proposals but also the 




cumulative landscape and 

visual and other environmental 

effects with windfarms within 

60 kilometres (km) of the 

proposals. 

As part of the visual 

assessment, viewpoints in the 

area surrounding the site will 

be selected as representative 

of the range of views and 

types of viewer likely to be 

affected by the project. Once 

the design is finalised it would 

be possible to create an 




from your property. Further 

information will be available in 

the Environmental Statement 








effects on land use, property 

and agriculture are assessed 

in Chapter 6 

the effects of noise are 




Coriolis LLP Project Developer 

sent an email on 08.12.09 offering 

consultee meeting. Maps of the 

windfarm layout were delivered by 

hand on 10.12.09 

The land farmed consists of Broadlees, Hazeldean 

Mains and Blackhouse 

Concerns relate to the noise level, the effect on cattle 

grazing, growth of silage fields and pastureland 

Is there vibration through the ground? 

concern about noise and visual change 

21 Consultee 

Newton Mearns 








22 Consultee 

Support the project wholeheartedly 

Response by email 04.12.09: -- 

Newton Mearns 

Wind power is the most suitable future power source Thanked for comments 

as it is safe and eventually the land can be restored to Note that all comments will be 

its original beauty if and when an equally safe source collated and reported in PAC 

of energy can be found 




website 

23 Bennan Syndicate They have not been consulted by letter and would like Emailed copy of EIA consultation Effects on land use, property and 

to be for fishing and other outdoor interests in the area letter on 13.09.11 to consultee agriculture are assessed in Chapter 

Also noted that Eddie Robertson has interest at (Bennan Syndicate). For details of 6 of the ES 

Craigloch and would be worth getting in touch 

feedback from consultee to EIA 

Need to consult with Bennan and Craig Angling Clubs letter see Annex A of the ES 

(two) 

Concerned about changes in amenity from increased Emailed EIA letter to: Eaglesham 

number of bikes and walkers not water quality which Fly Fishers, Eddie Robertson, 

they know will be controlled 

Craigloch and John Stewart, 

Gordon Henderson is contact at Bennan Hill 

Soames Premier Flywater (For 

details of any feedback or 

information see the response see 

Annex A of the ES) 

24 Consultee 

Several concerns about the development 

Coriolis Energy LLP Project The following information has been 

Kilmarnock 

Concern – the construction traffic from Whitelee has Developer met with consultee in included in the ES: 

just stopped going past their house and now will start person on 10.12.09 to discuss the the effects of noise are 

up all over again. Principle problem is light shining proposals and provide the considered in Chapter 12: 

into the windows at night – scare the family 

consultee with up to date layouts of Noise and Vibration 

Fenwick Bridge (Best Friend Cottage very affected the proposals: 


during construction of Whitelee by deliveries of heavy Consultee noted that and agriculture are assessed 

loads-noise and light and police escorts 

deliveries for Whitelee in Chapter 6 

Concerns re effects on wildlife-birds and bats 

disturbed their children’s information on traffic and 

How many loads will be needed for each turbine (5) 

sleep and caused access is included in Chapter 

rearrangement in house to 4: Traffic and Access 

manage 

They will distribute posters 

and postcard campaign to 

neighbours 

Asked for notification of 




delivery times etc to enable 

them to prepare for the 

effects 

Asked for email describing 

the effects (this has been 

sent to them by Project 

Developer) 

Discussed mitigation 

measures from replacement 

windows to roadside signs, 

soft landscaping – noted that 

would provide them with 

traffic mitigation measures 

before the planning 

application is submitted – 

these will be provided to the 

consultee in advance of 


application 






the landscape and visual 

effects have been considered 



proposals) 






in Chapter 6 


See Consultee Number 17 in Table 

3.1, above for note of previous 

consultation. 




proposals: 

Consultee asked for wirelines 

from their property 

Expressed dislike for the 

proposals 

Is worried about value of their 

property 

25 Consultee Does not want to see the turbines from his property 

He has been a resident for 12 years 

Why do we need more turbines in this area? 

Worries about noise 

Can he have wirelines/ visualisations taken from his 

property so he can understand whet he will be able to 

see 

Worried about the impact on his house price 

His currently unspoilt view ill be spoilt 

Windfarm will ruin the local environment 

Windfarm will upset the local householders and 

community 

It is purely a commercial venture 




The closest turbine is within half a mile of his property property 


The local amenity value of the area will be ruined Stated that the road to South ecology and nature 

Swan Cottage behind South Moorhouse: Concerns re Moorhouse is quiet but conservation is provided in 

visual changes; wildlife; access conflicts-lorries and already dangerous and wants Chapter 10: Ecology and 

cars and children using tracks by reservoir; changes to to know how construction Nature Conservation 

amenity 

traffic would be controlled 





in Chapter 6 

mitigation measures to ensure 

that construction activities 

would not pollute 

watercourses are included in 

Chapter 8: Water Quality and 

Drainage 

The effects of noise are considered 

in Chapter 12: Noise and Vibration 

of the ES 



the effects of traffic and 

access assessed in Chapter 4: 

Traffic and Access and 

mitigation measures defined 



in Chapter 6 

an assessment of cumulative 








proposals: 

Consultee noted that the 

proposals would seriously 

affect value and amenity of 

property and house 

Concerned that construction 

would pollute watercourses 

26 Consultee Interested in the development 

Gas main runs from Kirkton Moor Road 

Has good source of rock on his land 

27 Bonnyton Golf Club Concern about noise at Bonnyton Noted – continued communications 

with this consultee (see Consultee 

Number 12, Table 3.1 above) 

Information included in the EIA 

where appropriate 

Construction Traffic 

Do not want construction workers traffic through 

Eaglesham 

General Comments 15 

Access 

It would be beneficial to the whole of the community 

for access tracks to link into to paths near Hazeldean 

for recreational value 

Is it possible to better link the new site with Whitelee 

for bikes and pedestrians? 

15 These include comments and feedback received in person at the public exhibition and are not attributable to individuals 




Eg extend the core path type network? 

effects is provided in each 

Should be promoting walking and cycling to fit with 

chapter of the ES 

Government healthy living and other initiatives 

the landscape and visual 

effects have been considered 

Whitelee 


Whitelee turbines can create mini rainbows 


got enough turbines with Whitelee, do not need any 

proposals) 

more 


Someone who lives within the Whitelee site does not 


want any more turbines nearby 

conservation is provided in 

Scottish Power Environmental Statement was full of 

Chapter 10: Ecology and 

lies and they haven’t stuck to their commitments 


Resident from Waterfoot and other locations-lot of 

Information about the 

turbines-there are enough; Eaglesham is a 


Conservation Area 


Whitelee is the largest windfarm in Europe this is 

Economic Effects 

enough 

A carbon footprint of the 

hates the Whitelee development; noise and visual 

proposals is provided in 

change; Scottish Power have not done what they said- 

Chapter 7: Geology, Soils and 

do not back-rate the turbines; waste of money-will be 

Contaminated Land 

dismantled in future 

Landscape 

windfarms ruin the landscape 

views from Eaglesham could be compromised 

from Ballageich Hill there are views to Ireland, so will 

the windfarm be visible from Ireland? 

Do not want uninterrupted view lost 

Will the visualisations etc be available on the website 

Why are turbines so white? 

Design 

Where will the anemometers be? 

Concerned as to what happens at the end of the life of 

the windfarm – will it be taken away? 




Wildlife 

Badgers are present close to the south east boundary 

of the site. This is a main sett with satellite setts in 

Long Wood. There are pipistrelle bats in the area (see 

marked up map) 

Sheep around Moorhouse were tested for fallout from 

Chernobyl. Some still monitored but not Moorhouse 

site 


Avoid cutting trees where possible-trees capture 

carbon 

Traffic 

Traffic has increased through Eaglesham since 

Whitelee opened and in particular the visitor centre 

This includes bike traffic along Montgomery and 

Polnoon Streets where bikes are going very fast 

coming back from Whitelee often without bells 

Increase traffic during construction from workforce 

access (ie even though heavy loads use a different 

route 

New Development 

A small development of new houses is proposed off 

Moor Road in the three fields at the edge of the 

village-nothing allowed over 3 storeys and to include 

some bungalows 

Community Trust Fund 

Many visitors asked for any Community Fund to be 

paid into a Trust which was controlled by the 

Community Council and not via the Council 

This would have benefits in terms of administering the 

fund for smaller projects and also for contributing 

where appropriate to the 12.5% community 

contribution which is still required for projects funded 

through the Whitelee fund which is administered by 




through the Whitelee fund which is administered by 

ERC 

Carbon Footprinting 

What is the carbon footprint of the development 

including manufacture? 

General 

Windfarms are a waste of money 

Prefer wind energy to nuclear (several people 

commented on this) 

Prefer nuclear to wind (one person) 

Windfarms are wrong-only work as they are subsidised 

Too many are being consented 

Connections can be expensive 

How much of time will turbines generate electricity? 

How much time at full capacity? 

Why are three anemometers required? 

Why required if one on each turbine 

How many jobs created by maintenance activities 

during operation? 

Will there be a visitor centre (several) 

Good staff at exhibition; good exhibition 

Grid connection-where will this be? 



4 HOW THE PAC HAS MET PAN 81 GUIDANCE 

PAN 81: Community Engagement – Planning with people provides advice to planning authorities and developers on how communities should 

be properly engaged in the planning process and sets out good practice. Its ten standards for delivering effective community engagement in 

land use planning and how they have been met through PAC are identified in Table 4.1. 

Table 4.1 How the PAC has met PAN 81 Standards 

PAN 81 Standard PAC Activities Undertaken to Meet Standard 

Standard 1: Involvement: Identify and involve EIA consultees identified and contacted at Scoping stage and during EIA. Consultees were asked to identify any 

the people and organisations who have an 

additional consultees who should be contacted (see Section 3.2.2 and Annex A of the ES) 

interest in the focus of the engagement 

Landowners involved in the proposals contacted (see Section 3.2.3) 

ERC and CC’s contacted at Scoping stage, during EIA and provided with Proposal of Application Notice (see Annex 

A) 

Wider community notified of proposals and public exhibition through Information Leaflet (see Annex D) and Advert in 

two local newspapers (see Annex C) 

Public Exhibition held to provide opportunity for all to attend and comment (see Table 3.2) 

Project website set up for all interested parties to access 

Standard 2: Support: Identify and overcome any A barrier to involvement which was identified was how to ensure that the community and other stakeholders were 

barriers to involvement. Where possible, include made aware of the proposals and the public exhibition. To overcome this the Information Leaflet was sent out to 

the opportunity to access information in 

some 11,000 properties in the locality of the proposed site as well as providing this information to and inviting three 

alternative formats for minority groups and 

CC’s to the exhibition 

people with disabilities 

Consultees were encouraged to communicate by email, letter, telephone or in person at the public exhibition (see 

Table 3.1 and Table 3.2) 

A project website was set up to provide information about the proposals and provide a facility for consultee 

comments (see Table 3.1) 

Standard 3: Planning: Gather evidence of need A Proposal of Application Notice was submitted to ERC Planning Department and Eaglesham and Waterfoot CC, 

and resources to agree purpose, scope and 

Mearns CC and Fenwick CC. The Proposal of Application Notice outlined the proposed approach to consultation 

actions. Continuous engagement should be 

and the PAC activities which would be undertaken to inform the developing design of the proposed development. 

undertaken and any proposals within which 

This provided a framework for the PAC activities. 

decisions will be taken should be expressed 

openly and honestly and communicated at an 

early stage in the process so people know what 

to expect 




Standard 4: Methods: Agree and use methods The Proposal of Application Notice outlined the methods of engagement and ERC Planning Department confirmed 

of engagement that are fit for purpose. 

the approach (see Annex A) 

Mechanisms that promote dialogue, rather than Methods of engagement were intended to be engaging and promote a dialogue with consultees. Any emails or 

one-way communication. Develop a portfolio of letters from consultees were responded to by the project team in as much detail as possible and consultees were 

methods to engage with communities 

invited to attend the public exhibition to discuss any concerns 

The public exhibition was designed to be interactive with information boards describing the proposals, members of 

the project team on hand to discuss the proposals and any consultee concerns, a comments and feedback form to 

provide the opportunity for written comments and information on how to find out more information (project website) 

and how to contact the project team in the future (postal address, email address, telephone contact etc) 

Standard 5: Working Together: Agree and use The Proposal of Application Notice outlined the methods of engagement and the procedures for PAC to three CCs 

clear procedures that enable participants to work and ERC (see Annex A) 

together effectively and efficiently. It is important Wider community were informed in the Advert which was published in two local newspapers (see Annex C) and on 

for the community to understand the decision 

an information boards at the public exhibition (see Annex B) that any comments on the proposals made at that stage 

making process, their role within it and what can would be included in the PAC Report and that representations on the planning application should be submitted to 

and can not be influenced 

ERC after the planning application has been lodged 

Standard 6: Sharing Information: Ensure The project website offered a forum by which to provide information updates as the proposals developed 

necessary information is communicated between The public exhibition was designed to be informative with information boards describing the proposals, members of 

the participants. Regular workshop sessions or the project team on hand to discuss the proposals and any consultee concerns, a comments and feedback form to 

forums should take place between the planning provide the opportunity for written comments and information on how to find out more information (project website) 

authority and customer focus groups 

and how to contact the project team in the future (postal address, email address, telephone contact etc) 

Standard 7: Working with Others: Work Every effort was made to work effectively with consultees in the area 

effectively with others with an interest. Promote EIA consultees were identified and contacted at Scoping stage and during EIA. Consultees were asked to identify 

sustainable engagement by making strong links any additional consultees who should be contacted (see Section 3.2.2 and Annex A of the ES) 

with other relevant community structures and 

Landowners involved in the proposals were contacted and provided with information updates every 4 to 6 weeks (see 

organisations 

Section 3.2.3) 

ERC and CCs contacted at Scoping stage, during EIA and provided with the Proposal of Application Notice (see 

Annex A) 

Wider community notified of proposals and public exhibition through Information Leaflet (see Annex D) and Advert in 

two local newspapers (see Annex C) 

Public Exhibition held to provide opportunity for all to attend and comment (see Table 3.2) and subsequent meetings 

held to try to understand specific community issues and/ or concerns (see Table 3.2) 

Project website set up for all interested parties to access 

Standard 8: Improvement: Develop the skills, Members of the project team have undergone appropriate training and have extensive public consultation skills 

knowledge and confidence of the participants. 

Everyone with public or community liaison 




responsibilities should have appropriate training 

The PAC Report provides information on all consultee views received throughout the PAC process. Annex A of the 

ES provides all EIA consultee comments 

As demonstrated in this table and this PAC Report 

and customer care skills 

Standard 9: Feedback: The more the process is 

clear and transparent, the more likely it is that 

people will be able to understand and accept the 

final decision. People who have commented 

should be able to see how their views have been 

taken into account; and informed of the decision 

and reasons for that decision 

Standard 10: Monitoring and Evaluation: 

Monitor and evaluate whether engagement 

achieves its purpose and meets the national 

standards for community engagement. 

Evaluation of feedback and demonstration of 

how it has influenced the proposals 



5 SUMMARY 


This section provides a summary of the key comments, concerns and issues 

raised during PAC and demonstrates what alterations, if any, have been made to 

the proposals as a result of consultation. 

5.2 SUMMARY 

The information and comments provided by consultees throughout the PAC 

process and by those consulted as part of EIA have been noted and have helped 

inform the developing design of the proposals and the assessment in the EIA. 

Considerable effort has been made to continue to inform people who responded to 

the consultation about the progress of the project. In all cases consultee 

responses, whether verbal at the exhibition or via email/ letter from the web site or 

leaflet, have received a first response to their comments or their requests for more 

information. It is intended that we shall inform all consultees of the timing of our 

planning application, when it is made. 

All consultees have been informed, often both verbally and in writing, that 

responses to this consultation process are not objections to the proposal, and that 

any objections should be submitted to ERC after the planning application has been 

submitted. 

One to one meetings have been held with Bonnyton (on 10.11.09) and Eastwood 

Golf Clubs (on 23.02.10) and with some local residents (in December 2009). 

These meetings presented a changed layout from the design presented at the 

exhibition. 

At the time of completing the PAC report the applicant continues to engage with 

Eaglesham Community Council and both Bonnyton and Eastwood Golf Clubs, also 

informing local residents and the community about progress in the timing of the 

planning application. 

Some feedback from the public exhibition and in emails etc indicated some 

concern about the windfarm and in particular because of the already large scale 

development at Whitelee Windfarm. No significant material factors have been 

identified in the EIA process which would suggest that this is not a suitable site for 

development and some advantages are recognised in being in proximity to 

Whitelee Windfarm and in the location of the proposals in the Central Belt close to 

where the demands for electricity are greatest in Scotland. The windfarm would 

deliver a contribution to Government renewable energy targets in a suitable 

location and thus the proposals have been taken forward. 

Key alterations which were made to the proposed development as a result of 

consultation include: 

changes to the proposed site boundary so that it is located outwith any area 

zoned as Greenbelt in the Local Plan; 

input to the siting of access tracks; 



changes to the positioning of turbines to take account of identified constraints 

such as gas pipelines which gave knock on benefits in moving a turbine which 

was close to Long Wood, which was on the line of sight along the fairway of 

hole 4 at Bonnyton Golf Club and which was the most northerly proposed 

turbine, especially visible from the Titwood area. This gave a more cohesive 

structure to the proposals; and 

the project team recognised that the major significant effects were to local 

residents and recreational users. Offers of landscaping planting will be made 

to those parties and we believe that this will mitigate affects on visual amenity. 

PAC also provided a variety of other functions, including: 

gaining information on recreational interests in the area, views from properties, 

access etc which was fed through into the EIA and provided key baseline 

information or contributed to the assessment of the proposals; 

providing information to the local community on the developing proposals and 

an opportunity to ask for their views, issues, concerns or comments on the 

proposals at an early stage; 

helping to create a dialogue with the local community and interested parties 

with an aim to helping to allay the concerns of some members of the local 

community; 

providing the community with an opportunity to meet the project team and to 

ask the team questions, for further information and to arrange further meetings 

with the project developer; 

providing the community with a chance to find out how to contribute comments 

and/or information related to the proposals; and 

providing the community with information on the community trust funds and 

community investment opportunities. 

As a result of consultation at Scoping and at EIA information about the proposed 

site and its environs including the identification of key issues, opportunities and 

constraints were provided by key consultees and fed into the developing proposals 

and the EIA. The scoping and EIA responses together with an indication of how 

information and comments have been used in the EIA and in collating the ES are 

provide in Annex A of the ES. 


Annex A 

Pre-Application Consultation Notice

Sean McDaid 

Planning Department 

Council Headquarters 

Eastwood Park 

Rouken Glen Road 

Giffnock 

G46 6UG 

29 June 2009 

Dear Mr McDaid, 

Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm – Proposal of Application Notice 

As you are aware, from previous correspondence on this proposal, Coriolis Energy 

on behalf of Falck Renewables is developing a proposal for a windfarm of around a 

40MW capacity, with some 16 to 20 turbines, situated approximately eight kilometres 

(km) to the south west of Glasgow, near Eaglesham. In order to take the proposal 

forward, Coriolis Energy has appointed Natural Capital and their team as 

environmental consultants. 

Statutory requirements for pre-application consultation (PAC) are set out in the Town 

and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 

2008 and the relevant provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 

1997 as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. All national and major 

developments require PAC between developers and communities. These categories 

are defined in the (draft) Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) 

(Scotland) Regulations 2009. A major development includes ‘Electricity Generation: 

construction of an electricity generating station - the capacity of the generating 

station is or exceeds 20 megawatts’. The proposed Moorhouse Farmers windfarm 

has a 40MW capacity which means it is classed within the major category and is 

therefore subject to PAC. 

This submission presents our proposal of application notice (as attached). 

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you want to discuss any of this proposal in 

detail. 

1

We have also sent a copy of this letter to the following Community Councils for their 

information: 

Eaglesham Community Council; 

Mearns Community Council; and 

Fenwick Community Council. 

With many thanks for your help and please do not hesitate to contact me if you 

require any further information. 

We look forward to your response. 

Yours sincerely 

Megan Richardson 

Consultant 

2

Eaglesham and Waterfoot Community Council 

Mr John Simcox 

327 Glasgow Road 

Eaglesham 

Glasgow 

G76 0ER 

29 June 2009 

Dear Mr Simcox, 


As you are aware from previous communication with you Coriolis Energy on behalf of 

Falck Renewables is developing a proposal for a windfarm of around a 40MW capacity, 

with some 16 to 20 turbines, situated approximately eight kilometres (km) to the south 

west of Glasgow, near Eaglesham. In order to take the proposal forward, Coriolis Energy 

has appointed Natural Capital and their team as environmental consultants. 

Statutory requirements for pre-application consultation (PAC) are set out in the Town and 

Country Planning (Development Management Procedure (Scotland) Regulations 2008 

and the relevant provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as 

amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. All national and major developments 

require PAC between developers and communities. These categories are defined in the 

(draft) Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 

2009. A major development includes ‘Electricity Generation: construction of an electricity 

generating station - the capacity of the generating station is or exceeds 20 megawatts’. 

The proposed Moorhouse Farmers windfarm has a 40MW capacity which means it is 

classed within the major category and is therefore subject to PAC. 

As part of the PAC we have submitted a proposal of application notice to East 

Renfrewshire Council outlining our intended consultation activities for this project prior to 

the submission of a planning application and we attach a copy for your information. 

We have also sent a copy of this letter to Mearns and Fenwick Community Councils for 

information. 

With many thanks for your help and please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any 

comments or require any further information. 



Consultant 

1

Mearns Community Council 

Mr George Butler 

40 Netherplace Road 

Newton Mearns 

G77 6DG 

29 June 2009 

Dear Mr Butler, 


Coriolis Energy on behalf of Falck Renewables is developing a proposal for a windfarm of 

around a 40MW capacity, with some 16 to 20 turbines, situated approximately eight 

kilometres (km) to the south west of Glasgow, near Eaglesham. In order to take the 

proposal forward, Coriolis Energy has appointed Natural Capital and their team as 














the submission of a planning application and we attach a copy for your information. 

We have also sent a copy of this letter to Eaglesham and Waterfoot and Fenwick 

Community Councils for information. 





Consultant 

1

Fenwick Community Council 

Mr John McFadzean 

10 Dunlop Street 

Fenwick 

KA3 6EF 

29 June 2009 

Dear Mr McFadzean 


Coriolis Energy on behalf of Falck Renewables is developing a proposal for a windfarm of 

around a 40MW capacity, with some 16 to 20 turbines, situated approximately eight 

kilometres (km) to the south west of Glasgow, near Eaglesham. In order to take the 

proposal forward, Coriolis Energy has appointed Natural Capital and their team as 














the submission of a planning application and as your community council area adjoins the 

proposed site we attach a copy for your information. 

We have also sent a copy of this letter to Eaglesham and Waterfoot and Mearns 

Community Councils for information. 





Consultant 

1

East Renfrewshire Council 

Proposal of Application Notice 

Under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 

as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 

Introduction 

You should complete and submit this notice if you are proposing to undertake a ‘national’ or ‘major’ 

development as defined in the Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Development)(Scotland) 

Regulations 2009. You cannot submit for planning permission within 12 weeks of submitting this notice. 

See the Guidance Note for further information. 

1. Please give the name, address, telephone number and email address of the prospective applicant 

(and their agent if applicable) 

Prospective applicant’s details 

Name: Coriolis Energy LLP 

Address: 11 Eden Place 

Carlisle 

CA3 9JQ 

Phone number: 01228 545 954 

Email address: harry.malyon@coriolisenergy.com 

2. The postal address of the site: 

Address: 

Agent’s details applicant’s details (if applicable) 

Name: Natural Capital Ltd 

Address: 13 Coates Crescent 

Edinburgh 

EH7 4AF 

Phone number: 0131 220 6121 

Email address: 

annie.say@naturalcapital.co.uk 

If there is no postal address, please describe the location of the development as best you can: 

The proposed development site itself does not have a postal address. The proposed deevlopment 

is located to the west of Eaglesham and some eight kilmeters (km) south west of Glasgow, between 

the M77 and the B764 (NGR NS 527 507). For further details of the location of the proposed site 

see Section 4 and for how to contact the applicant and the project team see Section 1. 

3. Please attach a plan (to a recognised scale, 1:1250 is suggested) marked with the outline of the site 

and attach it to this notice. Please tick to confirm that a plan is attached Yes: 

N:\PROJECTS\185_Moorhouse Windfarm\Consultation\Statutory PAC Consultation\Pre-application Notice\Proposal of Application Notice for 

Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm_26.06.09.doc

4. Describe the development that is to be carried out and state whether it will be a national or a major 

application: 

LOCATION - The project would be based on land owned by a consortium of five farmers in the 

Moorhouse area, to the west of Eaglesham and some eight kilometres (km) south west of Glasgow, 

between the M77 and the B764 (NGR NS 527 507) . The proposed site is set on the gentle hills 

between the M77 to the west, A726 to the north and B764 to the south east. On the western 

boundary of the site lies Eastwood Golf Course with Bonnyton Golf Course situated on the eastern 

boundary. The village of Eaglesham is situated approximately 2km to the east of the site with the 

southern edges of Newton Mearns lying to the north of the site. 

THE PROPOSED SITE - The study area itself includes various scattered residential properties 

(approximately five houses). There is a small area of woodland to the north east of the site, Long 

Wood. Various access tracks, which tend to connect properties to fields and reservoirs, exist 

throughout the site. The site is drained by a series of small burns which drain into Lochcraig 

Reservoir and Bennan Loch which are located centrally on the site and are used as public water 

supply reservoirs. 

THE PROPOSALS - The anticipated potential capacity of the windfarm is estimated to be 40 Mega 

Watts (MW) with between 16 and 20, two to three MW turbines with a maximum tip height of 125m. 

This is classed within the major application category as defined in the (draft) Town and Country 

Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009. The turbines would be of a 

typical modern design incorporating tubular towers and three blades attached to a nacelle housing 

the generator, gearbox and other operating equipment. The transformer for each turbine would be 

housed either adjacent to the tower base or within the tower itself. This would depend on the chosen 

turbine manufacturer’s specification. The average wind speed on the site is high and it is therefore 

expected that Class 1 turbines would be required such as the Nordex 2.5MW N90. 

The key components of the proposals are: some 16-20 wind turbines; three anemometer masts; a 

permanent access route into the site from the B764; access tracks and underground cabling within 

the site; an electrical sub-station; a site office and store (may be the same building); and associated 

communications and other infrastructure. 

FURTHER DETAIL - For more detailed information on the proposals please refer to our Scoping 

Report which was submitted to East Renfrewshire Council Planning Department in October 

2008. 

5. Has the Council adopted a screening opinion; or have the Scottish made a screening direction (under 

the Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999) regarding the need for an 

Environmental Impact Assessment in respect of the development? 

Screening opinion: No Yes , if ‘yes’ give date of opinion: 

Screening direction No Yes , if ‘yes’ give date of direction: 

If yes to either of the above, please provide full details: The project team submitted a Scoping Report 

to East Renfrewshire Council Planning Department in October 2008. A scoping direction from East 

Renfrewshire Council Planning Department on November 21st 2008 was received providing guidance 

on key subject areas that the EIA should address. 



6. Please give a full account of what consultation will take place (1) . Continue on, or attach as separate 

sheet if appropriate. 

Please give details of: 

(a) what consultation will be undertaken, including details of the planned public meeting 

(b) the date of the consultation 

(c) who will be consulted 

We propose to complete the tasks as detailed in Table 6.1 in Attachment 1 to this pre-application 

notice to meet the requirements for pre-application consultation. 

7. Signed: 

Date: 

Print name of signatory: Dr Annie Say 

This notice should be submitted to: 

East Renfrewshire Council, 

Environment Department, 

Development Management Section, 

Eastwood Park, 

Rouken Glen Road, 

Giffnock 

East Renfrewshire 

G46 6UG 

or emailed to planning@eastrenfrewshire.gov.uk 

For telephone enquires, contact 0141 577 3000 

Notes 

(1) Please note the statutory minimum consultation requirements and also the expectations of the Council as contained 

in the accompanying guidance note 

The Council will use the above information in accord with statutory requirements, which will include publication in the 

Planning Register and in Weekly Lists of applications made to the Council; both of which will include publication on 

the Council’s web site. Sensitive and private information will not be published, in accord with Data Protection 

legislation. 



KEY 

Site Boundary 

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 

2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 

GLASGOW 

EAGLESHAM 

DRAWN BY: PQ CHECKED BY: AS DATE: 09/08 

Figure 1.1: Location of Proposals

Attachment 1 

Proposal of Application Notice for Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm 

Table 6.1 Proposed Pre-application Consultation Tasks 

Proposed 

Consultation 

1. Consult every 

community council 

whose area is within 

or adjoins the site 

2. Provide each 

Community Council 

with this proposal of 

application notice 

3. Public event: a 

manned interactive 

drop in Public 

Exhibition 

4. Advertisement of 

the public event 

5. Collate a PAC 

Report 

When With Whom Form 

Ongoing and 

throughout 

Community Council’s 

as follows: 

Eaglesham and 

Waterfoot* 

Mearns 

Fenwick 

Immediately Community Council’s 

as follows: 

Eaglesham and 

Waterfoot* 

Mearns 

September 

2009 

At least 7 days 

in advance of 

the public 

exhibition 

(August/ 

September 

2009) 

Throughout 

PAC process 

with complete 

report at end to 

be submitted 

with planning 

application 

Fenwick 

Local neighbours, local 

communities and 

community councils 

Local neighbours, local 

communities and 

community councils 

To be provided to East 


Planning Department 

with Environmental 

Statement and 

Planning Application 

Letter/email with 

telephone 

conversations as 

required 

Letter 

A manned interactive 

drop in – we propose 

that 2 to 3 members of 

the project team would 

be available to discuss 

the proposals at the 


Advert in local 

newspaper (Glasgow 

South and Eastwood 

Extra and Ayrshire 

Post) 

Written report including 

information on who has 

been consulted, steps 

taken to comply with 

statutory requirements 

and those of East 


planning authority and 

description of how 

applicant has 

responded to 

comments and extent 

to which proposals 

have changed as a 

result of PAC 

*Please note that Eaglesham and Waterfoot Community Council has been consulted twice to date on the developing 

proposals

Council Headquarters 

Eastwood Park 

Rouken Glen Road 

Giffnock 

East Renfrewshire 

G46 6UG 

Dear Sir/Madam, 

15 th July 2009 

Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the 

Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 

Invalid Notice – Proposal of Application Notice 

Thank you for you for your letter dated 10 July 2009 requesting further 

information on our Proposal of Application Notice. We have responded to 

your points below. 

1. Please confirm that you have consulted the Community Councils 

and on which date. 

1. Eaglesham and Waterfoot Community Council were consulted by letter in 

May 2008. This was followed up with a telephone call during which it was 

agreed that the EIA core team and Community Council would meet during 

the EIA process to discuss the developing proposals. 

2. Please confirm that you have provided the Community Councils 

with the proposal of application notice and when this was done. 

2. A copy of the proposal of application notices has been provided to 

Eaglesham and Waterfoot Community Council, Mearns Community Council 

and Fenwick Community Council on 29 June 2006 (please see Table 6.1 in 

Attachment 1 in the Proposal of Application Notice, I have re-attached this 

for ease of reference). John Sandyman from Mearns Community Council 

responded to the notice with a phone call on 14 July 2009 to discuss their 

concerns and request further information which has been provided. 

3. Please confirm the exact date and location of the public event. 

3. The exact date of the public event has not been confirmed as this is 

dependant on the EIA and developing proposals however it is planned to 

take place in September 2009 at the Eglinton Arms Hotel in Eaglesham.

4. Please confirm which local neighbours you have consulted and 

when this was done (the council’s guidance note indicates that 

applicants should as a minimum normally consult the same 

neighbours as if a planning application were to be submitted). 

A representative from Coriolis Energy LLP has been in regular contact with 

the landowners involved in the project and a meeting was held with the 

landowners and the Environmental Project Manager following submission 

of the Scoping Report in November 2008 to discuss the progress of the 

proposals. 

Copies of the EIA consultation letter and constraints map were provided to 

landowners in March 2009 and this was followed up with a Progress 

Update and revised turbine layout plan in May 2009 to inform landowners 

during discussions about the proposals with their neighbours. 

Adjacent properties have been consulted by letter to seek permission to 

place noise meters on their land and this consultation has been ongoing 

with phone calls and response letters. 

While we have not formally consulted all neighbours to the site informal 

consultations have taken place during site visits and we are planning to 

send out an information leaflet to all properties within a two kilometre radius 

of the site outlining the proposals, the progress to date and including 

visualisations of the turbines in the current layout. The leaflet will provide 

details on how to comment on the proposals. 

We hope that the information provided is sufficient to answer your queries. 

If you require any further information or would like to discuss any aspect of 

the Proposal of Application Notice then please do not hesitate to contact 

myself or my colleagues Dr Annie Say (Project Director) and Paddy Napier 

(Project Manager). 

Yours faithfully 


Consultant

Annex B 

Public Exhibition Information Boards

PROPOSED 

MOORHOUSE FARMERS 

WINDFARM 

PUBLIC EXHIBITION 

WELCOME

Proposed Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm 

PROJECT TEAM 

Builds and operates windfarms 

Active in the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, and France 

Approximately 320 MW of wind energy in operation or 

construction 

Specialist windfarm development company 

Coriolis is developing Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm 

for Falck Renewables 

An established environmental and sustainability 

consultancy 

Experience in EIA including energy projects 

Leading a team of experienced sub-consultants


What are the proposals? 

A windfarm of about 40 megawatt (MW) capacity, expected to have 

around 19 turbines of about 125 metres (m) height to blade tip 

Three anemometer masts to measure wind speed 

Permanent access route from the B764 road 

Access tracks and underground cabling 

An electrical sub-station 

A site office and store 

Associated communications and other infrastructure


Where will it be? 

West of Eaglesham, some eight kilometres south west of Glasgow, between the M77 and 

the B764 (NGR NS 527 507) 

Newton Mearns 

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 

KEY 

Eaglesham 

Study Area Boundary

Proposed Access Track


Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Licence number 

0100031673 

KEY 

Site Boundary 

Turbine 

Potential number of turbines visible 

based on indicative turbine layout of 

19 turbines with a 125m height to tip 

1-3 turbines visible 






Draft Zone of 

Theoretical 

Visibility (ZTV) to 

Tip Height


Draft visualisation of the view of the proposed windfarm from Bonnyton Golf Club 

The visualisations shown here are indicative and the final position of turbines may change. Access tracks and other 

supporting infrastructure, although not shown at this stage, are part of the proposals 

These visualisations have been generated using a computer model to help understand what the development might look 

like. Further updated visualisations will be included in the Environmental Statement submitted with the planning 

application


This is a visualisation of the view of the proposed windfarm from the Humbie 

Lawns 





application


This is a visualisation of the view of the proposed windfarm from the Eaglesham 

Moor Road 





application


ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process used to identify significant environmental 

effects and to identify measures to avoid, reduce and remedy these 

Key Findings of the EIA to Date 

Need to protect water quality in two reservoirs 

Areas of peat to be avoided where possible 

Opportunity to integrate visually with Whitelee Windfarm 

Nature conservation interests can be mostly mitigated 

Developing design taking account of potential for cumulative noise 

effects 

Current landuses including access can be safeguarded


National, Regional and East Renfrewshire Planning Policy on 

Wind Farms 

National Planning Policy for Renewable Energy - SPP 6 Renewable Energy (2007) - The Scottish 

Government is committed to encouraging the development of renewable sources of electricity generation 

as part of a package of measures in support of the its strategy for renewable energy which is set out in 

‘Securing a Renewable Future: Scotland’s Renewable Energy. This confirms a target of 18% of electricity 

generated in Scotland coming from renewable sources by 2010, rising to 40% by 2020 

Glasgow and Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan (GCVJSP) (2006) - Strategic Policy 8: Sustainable 

Development of Natural Resources identifies Potential Areas of Search for significant wind farm 

development on the southern and eastern edge of the structure plan area and supports development 

within these areas. The proposal site falls within a Potential Area of Search 

East Renfrewshire Local Plan (2003) - Policy E8: Renewable Energy: The Council will support 

renewable energy proposals, including wind turbine developments and bio-mass coppicing, in appropriate 

locations provided that it can be demonstrated that the environmental impacts of such proposals are 

minimised 

East Renfrewshire Replacement Consultative Local Plan (2008) - Policy E16: Renewable Energy: In 

relation to windfarms, the Council will assess all Planning Applications for such developments against the 

provisions of the SPP6 – “Renewable Energy” and any future guidance. Proposals for windfarm 

developments with an output over 20MW will, in principle be supported in the Potential Areas of Search for 

Windfarms, identified in the Structure Plan and shown on the Proposals Map


Wind Turbine Technology 

How a Wind Turbine Works


Community Consultation and Involvement: 

through leaflets, the website, this exhibition, letters and meetings will be carried out at 

the following stages: 

Before the turbine numbers and design is fixed 

When the planning application is submitted 

When key decisions have been made by East Renfrewshire Council 

Falck involve the community in two ways in their operation windfarms: 

Community Benefits: 

Trust fund established with annual payments related to the capacity built 

From this pot funds donated to support local projects 

Falck Established Community Ownership Scheme: 

Co-operatives are established at Falck windfarms so that the community has the opportunity 

to own a stake in their local windfarm alongside Falck 

Local residents offered the opportunity to purchase shares in these co-operatives 

Residents receive a return linked to project performance (subject to a guaranteed minimum) 

As an example, Boyndie Windfarm (near Banff) has an award winning scheme of a community 

co-operative with 700 shareholders


What Happens Next? 

If the environmental impact assessment (EIA) demonstrates that the effects 

from the project are acceptable a planning application will be submitted early in 

the new year 

The application will be decided by East Renfrewshire Council after a further 

statutory consultation period when the plans and EIA will be available. You will 

have an opportunity to comment to the Council at this stage 

If granted planning consent the project would be constructed once any 

conditions the Council have placed on us have been fully met 

After construction, a wind farm would be operational for approximately 25 

years. We would then be required to decommission the wind farm and make 

another planning application for a new project


HOW TO COMMENT 

There are maps on the back of the comment forms. Please feel free 

to write any comments or add further constraints or other information 

There are comment sheets at the entrance. Please fill one in and 

put it in the comments box by the door or send to us at: 

Natural Capital Ltd 


Edinburgh 

EH3 7AF 

Email any comments to: moorhousefarmers@naturalcapital.co.uk 

Visit our website at http://moorhousefarmerswindfarm.co.uk 

Please note comments made at this stage will be reported (not specifically attributed) in the Pre- 

Application Consultation Report but they are not representations to the planning authority. If the 

application is submitted there will be an opportunity to make representations on that application to 

the Planning Service at East Renfrewshire Council

Annex C 

Advert for Public Exhibition

Public Public Exhibition: Proposed 

Moorhouse Farmers Farmers Windfarm 

The exhibition for the proposed windfarm (located west of 

Eaglesham, some 8 kilometres south west of Glasgow, 

between the M77 and B764) is being held on Tuesday 

20 th October 2009 from 11am to 8pm at the Eglinton 

Arms Hotel, 59 Gilmour Street, Eaglesham, G76 0LG. 

Come along to find out more about the proposals 

and provide us with your comments. 

The project team will be available to explain the 

proposals and answer your questions 

For further information on the proposals please visit the website 

at www.moorhousefarmerswindfarm.co.uk 

Please note that any comments on the proposals made at this stage will be 

included in a pre-application consultation report. Representations on the 

planning application should be submitted to East Renfrewshire Council after the 

planning application has been lodged. 

ALL WELCOME

Annex D 

Information Leaflet and Distribution Maps

Existing view south west across proposed site from Ballageich Hill 

What are the proposals? 

• A windfarm of about 40 megawatt (MW) capacity, expected to have around 

19 turbines of about 125 metres (m) height to blade tip. 

• Three anemometer masts to measure wind speed. 

• A permanent access route into the site from the B764 road. 

• Access tracks and underground cabling within the site. 

• An electrical sub-station. 

• A site office and store (which may be the same building). 

• Associated communications and other infrastructure. 

Where will it be? 

• West of Eaglesham, some eight kilometres south west of Glasgow, between 

the M77 and the B764 (NGR NS 527 507). 

Who is the project team? 

• Falck Renewables plc (the funder for the project) and Coriolis Energy 

LLP (the developer) are taking the project forward in partnership with a 

consortium of local farmers. 

• Natural Capital Ltd environmental and sustainability consultants supported by 

a team of specialists. 

• Grontmij and Donaldson Associates providing technical and engineering 

expertise. 

Why is the windfarm needed? 

• To contribute to Scotland’s energy requirements in an environmentally 

responsible way. 

Why is it a good site? 

• It is in the Central Belt near to where energy needs in Scotland are greatest. 

• Wind speeds are expected to be sufficient. 

• Two suitable grid connection points are available close to the site. 

• The windfarm can be designed to fit in with the windfarm at Whitelee. 

What has been done to date? 

• Consultation with a range of stakeholders, Councils and statutory bodies to 

better understand the area and focus the required work. 

Existing view north east across proposed site from Ballageich Hill 

• 

• 

Site surveys and studies including wildlife surveys. 

Agreement with East Renfrewshire Council’s Planning Department 

(and relevant Community Councils) on the approach to pre-application 

consultations. Site surveys and studies including wildlife surveys. 

What happens next? 

• The project team is undertaking an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 

which is a process used to understand the potential significant environmental 

effects arising from the windfarm development and to identify measures to 

avoid, reduce and remedy these. 

• The EIA will cover: planning and policy, traffic and access, land use, geology 

and soils, water quality and drainage, landscape and visual impacts, ecology, 

cultural heritage, noise and vibration, air quality, shadow flicker and icing, 

telecommunications and aviation and socio economic effects. 

• Ongoing engineering studies and design development. 

• Ongoing consultation with the local community and key stakeholders 

(including a public exhibition in October 2009). 

• Submission of a planning application to the Council. This is likely to be in 

early 2010. 

How you can contribute? 

• By bringing any relevant information to our attention as soon as possible. 

• Visiting the public exhibition. This will be held on Tuesday 20th October 2009 

in the Eglinton Arms Hotel, Eaglesham. Further details will be advertised in 

the local press – please look out for this. 

• Visiting the website (http://www.moorhousefarmerswindfarm.co.uk). 

How to contact us 

• By email: moorhousefarmers@naturalcapital.co.uk 

• By post: Natural Capital Ltd, 13 Coates Crescent, Edinburgh, EH3 7AF 

• In person: at the public exhibition later this year 

• Visit the website: http://www.moorhousefarmerswindfarm.co.uk 

We value your comments and will respond to them. 

Thank you for taking the time to read this leaflet and we look 

forward to receiving your input 

PROPOSED 

MOORHOUSE FARMERS 

WINDFARM 

INFORMATION LEAFLET 

SEPTEMBER 2009 

What is this leaflet for? 

This leaflet provides you with information on the proposed Moorhouse Farmers 

Windfarm and explains how you can comment on the developing proposals. 

Centre point of site 

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2008. All rights reserved. 

Licence number 0100031673 

Eaglesham

Eaglesham Moor Road - Draft 90 degree photomontage 

Proposed view looking north west 

Bonnyton Golf Club - Draft 90 degree photomontage 

Proposed view looking south west 

The visualisations shown here are indicative and the final position of 

turbines may change. Access tracks and other supporting infrastructure, 

although not shown at this stage, are part of the proposals. 

These visualisations have been generated using a computer model to 

help understand what the development might look like. Further updated 

visualisations will be included in the Environmental Statement submitted 

with the planning application. 

DRAFT PHOTOMONTAGES

Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm – PAC Report 

Figure D1: Area of Distribution of Leaflet Area in which Leaflet was Distributed 

Key 

DRAWN BY: 

MR 

CHECKED BY: 

PN 

DATE: 03/10



Key 

DRAWN BY: 

MR 

CHECKED BY: 

PN 

DATE: 03/10



Key 

DRAWN BY: 

MR 

CHECKED BY: 

PN 

DATE: 03/10

Natural Capital Ltd 


Edinburgh 

EH3 7AF 

Tel: 0131 220 6121 

Fax: 0131 220 6131 

Email: info@naturalcapital.co.uk

Proposed Moorhouse Farmers Windfarm - Renfrewshire Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?