Wind farm proposals south of Crosshill could have major impacts on the village including thousands of heavy goods vehicles passing along King Street and Dalhowan Street, with associated noise, disturbance, vibration, and pollution. In addition, there could be significant impacts on the local landscape and views. Object now to say ‘NO!’ to the latest wind farm development in the area.

Save Straiton for Scotland are reaching out to our neighbours in Crosshill to make you aware of a current planning application that has been submitted for 10 x 200m tall wind turbines at a site called Back Fell in the Glenalla and Dalmorton forests. Details can be found at www.energyconsents.scot/ApplicationDetails.aspx?cr=ECU00004830

Although the site is around 3 miles south of Crosshill, the image above shows how visible the Back Fell turbines would be. Indeed, the applicant admits in their planning application that…

“Significant effects would occur primarily within the Water of Girvan valley north and east of the Site. This includes views from within the settlement of Straiton, Crosshill, and Kirkmichael, which lies in the valley immediately north of the Site. The Proposed Development would have significant (Major) visual effects on the visual amenity of Straiton and a significant (Moderate) for Crosshill and Kirkmichael due to the greater distance from the Site.”

In addition, all ‘abnormal load’ traffic which would transport the 85m turbine blades and sections of the 165m tall towers would pass through Crosshill. These massive vehicle loads would cause disruption to residents of Crosshill in terms of suspension of all on-street parking on King Street and Dalhowan Street, multiple instances of the loads oversailing of footways, removal of street furniture and destruction of vegetation and trees. These massive vehicles would also create noise and pollution, and could cause vibrations that could lead to structural damage. The image below shows 57m turbine blades and tower sections being transported as part of a scheme in Shetland. The turbine blades that would come through Crosshill would be half as long again, at 85m in length.

You can also click here to see the results of ‘swept path analysis’ conducted by the applicant for 85m turbine blade vehicles passing through Crosshill. This illustrates how much space would be needed and shows these vehicles passing just feet from people’s front doors.

In total, the applicant suggests that over 3,500 construction vehicles could pass through Crosshill as part of the Back Fell development over an 18 month period. Save Straiton for Scotland considers this to be a huge underestimation of the true number of vehicles, as does Transport Scotland. Based on other proposed local wind farm schemes, Save Straiton for Scotland considers the true number to be nearly 13,000 vehicle trips.

Two other wind farm schemes in the area (Carrick and Craiginmoddie) that are currently being considered by the Scottish Government would also see construction traffic passing through Crosshill. Adding in construction trips for these other two schemes to the Back Fell proposals, could see over 86,000 construction vehicles passing through Crosshill over a period that could range from 18 months to over 4 years.

We have provided an objection template below which you are welcome to use / edit, sign and submit. The objection should be emailed to representations@gov.scot with a copy (cc) to planning.development@south-ayrshire.gov.uk Please could you also copy (cc) to savestraiton@gmail.com so that we can keep an eye on the ECU website for publication. You can also post a hard copy of your objection to Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit, 4th Floor, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow, G2 8LU. You can also submit an objection to Econsents_Admin@gov.scot quoting Ref ECU00004830.

July 2025

To Whom It May Concern,

OBJECTION TO BACK FELL WIND FARM PROPOSAL (ECU00004830)

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Back Fell Wind Farm (ECU00004830) on the following grounds:

Visual Impact

The development would result in significant and irreversible visual harm, including the visibility of up to 10 turbines from multiple residential properties. Some homes will have as many as 7–10 turbines in direct view, with structures up to 200m tall. Even at a distance of around 3 miles from the site, the development would have a significant impact on the view from Crosshill looking south. The Residential Visual Amenity Assessment fails to offer site-specific reassessments or mitigation.

Traffic Access & Disturbance

The development would result in significant levels of construction traffic passing through Crosshill with associated noise, pollution, and disturbance. Of particular concern to residents of King Street and Dalhowan Street is vibration caused by construction and abnormal load vehicles which could lead to structural damage to the early 19^th century planned village’s buildings. Swept path analysis shows abnormal load vehicles passing within feet of multiple properties.

Human Health and Wellbeing

There is no health or wellbeing assessment included in the application. Given the scale of the development and its proximity to homes, the absence of such an assessment is a serious omission. Noise, flicker, lighting, and stress-related impacts require proper consideration.

Lack of Net Biodiversity Gain

The proposal fails to demonstrate a meaningful net gain in biodiversity. Instead, mitigation and further assessments are frequently delayed until after consent, which offers no guarantees for environmental protection.

Ecological Risk

The proposal lacks adequate ecological safeguarding. Key species such as bats, pine martens, otters, and amphibians, including great crested newts (which are known to be present locally), are either under-assessed or not assessed at all. Habitat destruction and biodiversity loss are real risks.

Peatland Disturbance

The proposed site includes carbon-rich peatland. No intrusive core peat surveys or landslip risk modelling have been submitted pre-consent. Much of the peat risk management is deferred to post-consent, which is unacceptable for such a sensitive environment.

Landscape Capacity and Wind Energy Suitability

According to the South Ayrshire Landscape Wind Capacity Study (2018), the site falls within a landscape character type deemed to have low to moderate capacity for large turbines. The study warns that cumulative development in these upland fringe areas could exceed landscape thresholds and cause unacceptable visual intrusion, particularly affecting small communities like Straiton and isolated dwellings.

Overreliance on Post-Consent Safeguards

Across multiple technical reports, including peatland management, ecological mitigation, and hydrological risk, the developer relies heavily on safeguards and mitigation plans that are only promised after planning consent is granted. This means that many serious risks are left unresolved at the time of decision-making, which is contrary to best practice and inconsistent with the principles of environmental protection.

We understand that other applications on this site, involving smaller and fewer turbines have previously been rejected, and for all the reasons stated above, I urge you to reject this application also.

Sincerely,

[Full Name]

[Postal Address or Postcode]