2 Jun 2025
Despite strong concerns over landscape impact and unresolved environmental issues, councillors on the Scottish Borders Planning and Building Standards Committee have agreed not to object to the proposed Dunside Wind Farm development during today’s meeting, following a recent site visit.
The proposed development comprises 14 turbines, some reaching up to 220 metres in height, and would be sited in the heart of the Lammermuir Hills, within a designated Special Landscape Area.
The project will now be considered by Scottish Ministers via the Energy Consents Unit (ECU). If approved, Dunside Wind Farm would adjoin the existing 48-turbine Fallago Rig scheme, transforming the central Lammermuirs into a near-continuous wind farm landscape.
Councillors acknowledged during the meeting that the landscape had already been significantly damaged by the existing Fallago Rig wind farm, and while they accepted that the Dunside proposal would have severe additional landscape and visual impacts, they ultimately accepted the recommendation from planning officers not to object.
Councillor Marshall Douglas: “I think to some extent the landscape already is a wind farm landscape…the damaged has been done. I don’t think by objecting to this application we would really be changing that.”
This decision is deeply disappointing. Councillors acknowledged the damage is already done, yet chose not to stand up for the remaining open landscape. The Lammermuir Hills are a nationally important area for biodiversity, scenery, and recreation.
Critics of the decision argue that planning officers and councillors have failed to fully consider up-to-date environmental data, particularly regarding the growing population of golden eagles in the region. The Lammermuirs fall within a key corridor for golden eagle expansion, as confirmed by Restoring Upland Nature (RUN, formerly South of Scotland Golden Eagle Project).
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) submitted by the developers significantly underestimates golden eagle activity in the area. The EIA records only two golden eagle flights, based on data from 2023, however the latest satellite tag data from RUN suggests that golden eagle activity is considerably higher in that area.
Despite the presence of multiple objections from statutory consultees—including the Ministry of Defence, NatureScot, NATS, SEPA, Historic Environment Scotland, Edinburgh Airport, and more —councillors chose not to submit a holding objection, a move which would have provided time for further review and local input.
Planning officials had cited National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) as justification for not objecting, arguing the framework's emphasis on renewable energy targets outweighed the considerable landscape harm.
NPF4 was never intended to give wind farms a blank cheque. It calls for ‘the right development in the right place’. A towering, industrial-scale project in the middle of a protected landscape with ecological significance is not the right place. The planning system is failing communities.
This proposal is largely seen as a new version of Fallago Rig 2, a similar application rejected by both Scottish Borders Council and the Scottish Government in 2020 due to visual and cumulative landscape impacts.
With Scotland already having over 49GW of wind energy either operational, in construction or approved—more than four times its projected peak demand—community and environmental groups argue that the justification for sacrificing sensitive landscapes to new schemes is increasingly weak.
Councillor Jane Cox said: “I am a bit confused about this. It’s the amount of energy power from win that we are developing here in the Scottish Borders. I have read that there is nearly 49GW of wind energy either now or under construction here I the Scottish Borders, whereas by 2050 we are only going to use 11GW. We have another 38GW under construction or available now that we aren’t going to use ourselves, hence the reason for some of these grid constraints.”
This was a missed opportunity to show leadership, to insist that nationally imposed targets be balanced against local realities, and to protect the character of one of the Borders’ last remaining open hill areas. We urge elected representatives to reflect on this decision and to recommit to a more transparent and inclusive approach in future.