We are developing our objections in detail as our review of the application progresses, but they are, in brief:

Landscape and visual impact: the turbines are huge and the profile of the landscape cannot absorb them. They will be the dominant feature of the area - not just of the Hill of Nigg but the Tarbat peninsula, too.

Cultural Heritage: the setting and atmosphere for, and visitors’ appreciation of, the many historic monuments, such as the Pictish cross-slabs, will be severely compromised, as will visitors’ appreciation of them. This will be for the life of the turbines, which is at least 25 years.

Local residents' amenity, especially those living close to the turbines, may be adversely affected by, amongst other things:

1. •Overbearing visual intrusion
   

2. •Loss of tourism affecting local small businesses, such as B&Bs
   

3. •Potential health hazards
   

4. •Strobe, shadow and flicker effects
   

5. •Noise and vibration
   

6. •The change from an agricultural to an industrialised landscape
   

7. •The Developer says house prices won't be affected, but won't put its money where its mouth is: it has refused to provide a local estate agents' survey or to guarantee that house prices won't be affected, so we take the risk, while it takes the profit from the turbines.
   

Minimal local benefits:

1. •with only around 300 homes in the area, the projected capacity to supply 7500 homes is of virtually no local benefit - in any case, the output will go to the National Grid.
   

2. •Also, since we expect the turbines and other major capital assets to be designed and built elsewhere and, once built, the farm being non-labour intensive, the prospect of substantial and sustained local employment benefits is remote and insignificant.
   

3. •Funding local charities/amenities and offering a chance to buy into the scheme hardly compensate the community or those families who would be worst affected. The only real benefits will go to the developer.
   

4. •Disproportionate damage for small gain: in this landscape, the damage to the locality is totally out of proportion to the small output from the farm.
   

5. •Conflict with HCRES and the Local Plan: the Highland Council's Renewable Energy Strategy (2006) clearly distinguished between major projects and local scale projects, the latter being schemes up to 5MW capacity. The HCRES prescribes areas where there is a presumption against development of major projects; the proposed development is for 10MW (thus a major project) and would be in such an area. Also, the developer would have to overcome the restrictions in the Ross and Cromarty East Local Plan.