Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Turbine developer claims councillors were ‘misled’

Turbine developer claims councillors were ‘misled’

A wind turbine developer has accused Aberdeenshire planners of misleading councillors after they rejected his proposal for a mast in the Buchan countryside.

Gavin Catto, director of Edinburgh-based Green Cat Renewables, was in Peterhead this week to speak to members of the Buchan area committee.

His client Roy Mathieson from Elgin had hoped to build a 326ft turbine at Hillhead, Bonnykelly, New Pitsligo, but the application was rejected over fears it would interfere with two key radars nearby.

Members were told by planning officers that the mast could be “blanked” from radar screens, but they would prefer to use that solution for another application.

Planning officer David Maclennan said: “Only one turbine or the other can be ‘blanked’ – and the council indicated to Nats (the national air traffic control service) that the other project would be more suitable in landscape terms.”

Now Mr Catto claims the advice was confusing for councillors, who may not have realised the implications of their decision.

He said:”I have great sympathy for the councillors in that this is a complex and at the moment rapidly evolving area and the advice provided to them from the planning service was far from clear.

“I don’t think all the councillors realised that they were in effect being asked to choose between the two projects.

“I can understand why the planning service may have wanted a decision like this to be taken by the elected members, but I would have thought it would have been better to have the two projects heard at the same committee, so that the councillors could make that decision based on full knowledge of both projects.”

However a council spokeswoman denied that members were misled.

She said: “Councillors were provided with a report in advance of the meeting which made clear that the blanking solution can only be applied to any one development within a three mile area and that the planning service considered an alternate development site more appropriate for this solution.

“The application for the alternate site was considered by planners and it was submitted to the council three months prior to the application at Bonnykelly.”