[YOUR ADDRESS]
            [DATE - send to arrive by 28th Jan]

Lesley Thomson
Scottish Executive Consents Unit
2nd Floor Meridian Court
Cadogan Street
Glasgow G2 6AT

Dear Lesley Thomson,

Planning Application by Airtricity Development Ltd for a Windfarm on the Kilpatrick Hills

I object [IMPORTANT TO STATE THAT YOU OBJECT] to the above application. My objection is based on:

1. Damage to the amenity of the area

• The proposed windfarm will seriously affect the amenity of everyone living in the area or visiting the Kilpatrick Hills.
• The Kilpatrick Hills provide a vital retreat for the huge population of Clydebank and Dumbarton, Milngavie. Bearsden,and West Glasgow, where folk can quickly get away into unspoiled wild land.
• I believe that the Kilpatrick Hills - especially this part - are too highly valued to locate a windfarm on them.
• The landscape is of an extremely high quality - the wide upland views are a prime feature and these large, moving, wind turbines will seriously depreciate the character of the area. Due to their prominent setting of the Kilpatrick Hills in the Clyde Valley, the turbines will be visible from almost all over the hills, and for many miles around, including from within the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park, and from Loch Lomond itself, from the Mugdock Country Park, and from across the Clyde at Newark Castle and Hunters Quay, most of the middle and lower Clyde Valley, the Glasgow conurbation and much of West Stirlingshire.
• This development would have a significant adverse effect on the landscape character and visual amenity.
• This landscape cannot absorb 24 turbines, buildings and roads, however well designed.
• Even the developer's Environmental Statement says that "visual impacts on recreational users of the Kilpatrick Hills during construction and operation are judged to be major, and on recreational users of the wider area around the Kilpatrick Hills are judged to vary from negligible to major.
• 24 turbines of total height 100m with 80m diameter blades will be extremely conspicuous, from all over he hills and well beyond. The scale of the turbines will be overwhelming and will dominate the landscape to a quite unacceptable degree.
• One of the joys of the Kilpatricks is to walk in an area which is largely unspoilt.
• The construction of the windfarm will involve the laying of roadways and large concrete bases over open moorland, which will affect the ecology and watercourses over a huge area, with possible pollution of watercourses which run into the several public water supply reservoirs on and adjacent to the site.
• It is not acceptable that landscape of this quality should be used to site such conspicuous and inappropriate industrial development.
• Government targets for tens of thousands of turbines threaten much of our very finest landscape, which includes this location.

2. Adverse effect on tourism

• This development would have a significant adverse effect on the use and enjoyment of these natural heritage locations.
• Tourists and visitors from Glasgow and beyond will be deterred from visiting this scenic area.
• Many people who enjoy the area - eg walkers, anglers and wildlife watchers - will not be aware of the proposal. It was only advertised locally and in small back page newspaper adverts just before Christmas.
• Once the novelty of windfarms has worn off, the existence of one at a scenic area would be detrimental to the local economy. Visitors would spend their money going elsewhere.
• The proposed development will adversely affect efforts to encourage the tourist industry of the area as this is largely based upon the quiet appreciation of the countryside and its views by walkers and others. These are the people who are most likely to be upset and off-put by the intrusion of the turbines.
• The development would blight the establishment of a link to the West Highland Way from Clydebank (which just needs a few notices and some publicity).

3. Loss of wildlife

• Birds would be killed by turbines and their habitats destroyed.
• Important birds breed near to here. They would be at risk of hitting the turbines, or driven off by the fuss and noise.
• There are vulnerable birds here, like black grouse on the RSPB red danger list. At least 4 red data bird list species nest or have nested recently on or adjacent to the site.
• The developers consider the potential loss of habitats, and bird strikes, to be negligible. But what is negligible to a power supplier is not negligible to those who visit the hills.
• There are five SSSIs within 2Km., three actually bordering the site or approach road. There are 3 SINCs within 2Km., one on site (Fynloch Heath) and one traversed by the access road (Kilpatrick Braes). The importance of the natural history of the area is recognised by these designations. It is inconceivable that an industrial complex could be erected right in the middle of these sites.

4. Noise, pollution and safety

• WInd turbines produce penetrating low-frequency noise pollution, day and night, which makes some physically ill.
• The noise level is estimated by Airtricity to be over 100Db at source.
• The substation would need security lighting, causing light pollution.
• Broken blades, and ice blocks flung in winter, are hazardous to locals, visitors, and wildlife.
• The new road junction would be on a very dangerous fast stretch of the A82.
• There would appear to be concern over aviation safety as regards effects on guidance systems and on the physical size of the structures within the flight path of Glasgow airport.

5. Harm to housing

• Distress can be expected from noise.
• TV interference for 40,000 people.
• The value and saleability of surrounding properties will be diminished.

6. Unsatisfactory economics and employment

• There will be little work for local people. After construction there will be only four permanent jobs, and in view of the likely disproportionate damage to the tourist industry, there will be a net loss of jobs in the area.
• Saving pollution by insulation is 55 times more cost-effective than saving it by wind turbines. Even such a huge development as this is too small to make any significant contribution to the national production of power - it is not an economic proposition without artificial, politically motivated, subsidies.
• This is one of the most expensive ways to generate electricity. It will all be for export from Scotland. Scotland generates 10/15% more energy than needed within Scotland, therefore spoiling the landscape to export electricity.
• The saving in CO2 pollution must be weighed against the energy used in making, transporting and erecting the turbines as well as site preparation. This must be considerable.
• There can be no guarantee that when the turbines come to the end of their natural life there will be the resources to remove them.

7. Against planning policy

• The Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan, the Dumbarton Local Plan, the new Clydebank Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Guidelines on Renewable Energy discourage windfarm development in a Regional Scenic Area such as the Kilpatricks, or outwith designated preferred places (which are to the south and east of Glasgow).
• The access route to the site goes through the Green Belt, which should be protected from the vast construction phase and daily visits by windfarm staff.
• Industrial structures such as wind farms should be in appropriate locations. Industrial estates are often good locations. They are close to users of power, and there is often sufficient background noise from the industry that the extra noise from the turbines is masked.

8. Precedent

• Airtricity doesn't need to be on this site - it is just the easiest one for them to develop.
• If planning consent is granted, it will set a precedent for a multitude of similar, ineffective, inefficient windfarms throughout the Kilpatrick Hills and the surrounding green belt.

For all the above reasons, I urge the Scottish Executive to reject this application.

Yours faithfully,