Second turbine challenge rejected

JON SAVAGE PHOTOGRAPHY'07762 58097'www.jonsavagephotogrtaphy.com'FOR STOCK STANDARD REPRO'CRYSTAL RIG 2 WIND FARM, NEAR DUNBAR, EAST LOTHIAN'WIND 'TURBINES'RENEWABLE'RECYCLE'ENERGY'ELECTRICITY'GREEN
JON SAVAGE PHOTOGRAPHY'07762 58097'www.jonsavagephotogrtaphy.com'FOR STOCK STANDARD REPRO'CRYSTAL RIG 2 WIND FARM, NEAR DUNBAR, EAST LOTHIAN'WIND 'TURBINES'RENEWABLE'RECYCLE'ENERGY'ELECTRICITY'GREEN

A second legal challenge to plans for two wind turbines at a Berwickshire beauty spot has been rejected.

The local review body (LRB)of Scottish Borders Council originally granted permission for the project near Cocksburnpath in March 2013.

In January the following year the decision was unsuccessfully challenged at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

The court was told at the time that the appeal, raised in the name of objector Sally Carroll, was the first of its type in Scotland.

Now three judges have refused the “reclaiming motion” of objector Sally Carroll.

They said the local review body’s decision was lawful and complied with “relevant statutory requirements”.

The legal challenge concerned plans for two 100-metre high wind turbines on “highly sensitive” coastal farmland.

The planned location is near the Berwickshire Coast and Lammermuir Hills Special Landscape Areas and the Southern Upland Way.

The opinion of the court, delivered by Lord Menzies, read in part: “The appellant...objected to the grant of planning permission. She is aggrieved by the decision of the LRB dated March 21, 2013. She appealed to the Court of Session on the basis that the decision was not within the powers of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (“the 1997 Act”) and that the relevant requirements of that Act have not been complied with.”

In summing up, it continued: “Whilst the LRB’s decision letter is not a model of clarity or an example of the best practice which might be achieved under the proceedings introduced by the 2006 Act...it says enough in its own terms and by its reference to other material to satisfy us that its decision is within the powers of the 1997 Act.”