Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril-5-2016-minutes-WFAC-final.pdfTown of Enfield Wind Farm Advisory Committee Meeting – April 5, 2016 - Enfield Community Building 1 PRESENT: Councilperson Mike Carpenter, Martha Fischer, Marcus Gingerich, Jude Lemke, Mimi Mehaffey, Councilperson Michael Miles, Julie Schroeder ABSENT: Rob Tesori OTHER IN ATTENDANCE (Audience): Councilperson Henry Hansteen, Supervisor Ann Rider Michael Miles called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and lead the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Approval of Minutes (3-22-16) Corrections to March 22, Wind Advisory Committee Minutes Change Anne Korean to Anne Koreman on page 3 and 4. Motion was made to approve the March 22 minutes as corrected. Motion passed to approve minutes unanimously. Old Business Michael Miles reminded everyone of the windadvisory@townofenfield.org e-mail to send articles/research/comments/suggestions to and the https://trello.com/enfieldwindfarmadvisorycommittee site for research articles, laws, and minutes of the Committee. Michael Miles reminded the audience to keep all comments until the end of the meeting during the Privilege of the Floor. He reminded everyone that questions should be directed to the whole Committee and not personal attacks on individuals. Update on Supplemental Draft EIS Michael Miles stated that the Public Comment for the DSEIS has been extended to April 22. There will be no Wind Advisory Committee meeting on April 12 because of the scheduled Public Hearing at 7 pm at the Enfield Elementary School. Committee Group Report Updates Committee members reported working with their groups on the DSEIS and wind turbines. Michael Miles submitted his Ice and Blade Throw Report to the Committee. He modeled his report figures for the wind turbines based on the research presented by Dr. Jonathan Rogers, Assistant Professor, Automation / Mechatronics, Georgia Tech. Marcus Gingerich asked where the data for the statistics for blade failure came from. Michael Miles answered, “Dutch Handbook for Risk Assessment of Wind Turbines.” It Town of Enfield Wind Farm Advisory Committee Meeting – April 5, 2016 - Enfield Community Building 2 was stated that it was not clear on what blade failure meant. Martha Fischer asked what technology was used in the wind turbines that shut the turbines down during blade icing. Michael Miles said he was not looking at the actual mechanical technology f or his report. He stated that there are two different anemometers used to measure the wind speed. It was suggested that perhaps a preventative method for icing would be to heat the blades; it is a lot of area to heat. There was discussion on the different dynamics and physics of blade throw and ice throw. It was pointed out that in manufacturing of wind turbines as the blades grow in length the tower grows in height. Jude Lemke reported that in her research “bearing” failure was reported. It was also stated within the Committee that Europe has a lot of research regarding icing because of the northern climate. There is an annual Winter Wind Conference that addresses icing issues. Michael Miles reported that some manufacturers are looking into manufacturing the wind turbine blades by sections, making it easier to transport. Jude Lemke handing her report in to the Committee she stated she is still working on it. She reported on bearing failure and fires. She reported that the nasal area of the wind turbine involved oil and highly flammable material. Lighting is a big cause of fires in the wind turbine. The wind turbines actually cause some of the lighting. There are no mandatory fire safety regulations regarding wind turbines, although OSHA does regulate some of it. Europe has a complete handbook regarding fire regulations. Mitigation would be a fire suppression system which the wind turbines do not have. T There was discussion on how toxic the smoke from a wind turbine fire could be, including if a blade fell on the ground on fire. This smoke would be toxic to both neighbors to the wind turbines and fire company members involved in fighting any fire at the wind turbines. The BOWF has stated that they will provide training to the Fire Company regarding the wind turbines. It is unknown if BOWF will provide any of the extra equipment if needed or if they would help purchase any additional equipment. Jude Lemke said she would finish the report and se nd it to Michael Miles. Mike Carpenter asked if the Committee was still supposed to submit their reports to the Town Board at the April 6 meeting as stated in the March 22 minutes. Michael Miles said no they would be submitting their reports at the April 13 Board meeting. Julie Schroeder reported on her Water Resources - Climate and Air Quality which was submitted to the Committee. She stated that since there was not an exact plan submitted yet for the wind turbines placement it was hard to analysis impacts on water resources. The DEC standards regarding impacts on wetlands are covered in the EIS. She stated that air quality will be improved in the area. An Environmental Monitor will be hired for the project. She feels the Town of Enfield should have discretion in hiring for this position. It was reported that Labella has put in a proposal for the Monitoring position. Marcus Gingrich asked about the reference to wind turbines in Chautauqua, NY and the airflow monitoring report. Julie Schroeder said she would double check the results in the report. Mimi Mehaffey stated that the topography was not going to change. She asked about Town of Enfield Wind Farm Advisory Committee Meeting – April 5, 2016 - Enfield Community Building 3 how the wind turbines would be held in place. She wondered how Tectonic Engineering performed the testing for the DEIS. She said there were no test borings for the proposed new tower (page 6) and the Met Tower. This procedure needs to be done before the permit is approved. She feels if it is not in the EIS then BOWF will not be required to do the testing. Mike Carpenter reported that building specifications would be approved by inspectors. Inspectors are being hired outside of the town, meaning that Alan Teeter, Code Enforcer would not be responsible for these inspections . It was stated that they can get conclusions regarding the sites from the test boring already done. It is based on Engineering Standards and if the Engineers state that testing has to be done then it will be done. Labella Engineers are designated to report messages regarding the project on a weekly and even a daily basis if needed. There was discussion regarding clearing the areas around the wind turbines. There are clear instructions on how far they will clear around the pad. It was all stated that BOWF still owes reports, information is lacking. The Town Board needs to point out to BOWF what still needs to be finished for the EIS. Mike Carpenter explained that there was a SEQR Handbook on line which tells you how to handle the process of applying for a SEQR. It tells you what you need to get from each section, what reports are needed. It was also advised that the Town might want to setup a committee of two board members and their lawyer to meet on regular basis regarding the wind farm. This would help in answering questions that come up on the process of the project. Frank Pavia from Harris Beach is the lawyer on wind farm issues for the Town. If it comes to the Town being sued regarding the wind farm the Town would have another lawyer. Frank Pavia advocates for the town. It was stated that Tompkins County Planning Department advised the Town that the Wind Law was in adequate when it was first drawn up. Labella Engineering, who is working for the town , has also pointed out many issues regarding the project. Under the Supplemental EIS all comments will be given to the BOWF including Labella’s. Martha Fischer reported that the group (Martha Fischer, Marcus Gingerich, Charles Elrod) on sound and noise have written two separate reports. They will have to combine the reports and submit them to Michael Miles. Their issue is a very complex one as people are affected by noise in different ways. They will summarize the information. The Town needs to decide the threshold level of the noise, is it where no one is annoyed or what percentage of noise is acceptable. In regard to setbacks there is no clear answer, it is the acceptable risk the Town wants. The answer may not be known unless you live in the area of the wind turbines when and if they are put in place. Marcus Gingrich stated there was lots of data regarding the nocebo effect and wind turbines, where the mere suggestion of side effects can bring on negative symptoms. Michael Miles reported that GE Engineers have not answered the questions that the Committee submitted to them. He will check with them again. Town of Enfield Wind Farm Advisory Committee Meeting – April 5, 2016 - Enfield Community Building 4 Jude Lemke has asked through a FOIL request for the data used by BOWF in monitoring the sound study. It was stated that a technical and environmental sound study was in the EIS. Mike Carpenter reported on his research in regard to BOWF dealing with problems which might occur in the project. He reported that in most categories where there has been conflict with the project and BOWF – he felt the problem was not talked about or they would say there was no problem but if there was, this is how they would handle it. He referred to the Good Neighbor Agreement which if signed; the person would be giving up their legal rights to complain about noise, light, shadows and a few other items. This document is said to be legally filed and would be a legal document which would even apply if the property owner sold their property. Mike Carpenter stated that there are many places within the EIS on mitigation. He read from the EIS - Appendix U - Community Outreach and Communication. There were references for mitigation during construction but not listed for post-construction. The only monitoring was in regard to avian studies. There was discussion on if the wind turbines would create communication problems (TV, Radio, etc.) in regard to clear access, would BOWF provide cable or satellite access to solve the problem. Shadow flicker mitigation was to put blinds in the windows. This does not address flicker while outside in your yard. Can the Good Neighbor Agreement be classified as a mitigation factor? It was stated that it was only fair to describe what BOWF has come up with regarding mitigation solutions. BOWF is dealing with people as a corporation. Jude Lemke was concerned about making it clear when people sign the Good Neighbor Agreement they are giving up a lot of rights and should consult a lawyer before it is signed. She does not want it to show that the Town endorses the Good Neighbor Agreement. Mike Carpenter said he would submit a written report regarding mitigation and to the Committee. Michael Miles requested all completed group reports be submitted to him ASAP. He will combine the reports together and resubmit them to the Committee for comments. He will add an appendix with review comments from the Committee. The report will then be submitted to the Town Clerk by Monday April 11, for submitting to the Town Board for the April 13th meeting. The Town Board will look at the report submitted to decide if they want to submit any of it as part of the Comment Period. Privilege of the Floor Dawn Drake of 105 Griffin Road stated she feels the wind farm project is being pushed through. She recommended a 90 day moratorium be put in place. She feels the Town Board is not informed on the project. The project was presented as a “green” project exciting for the future instead people are scared causing a lot of anxiety. This project will affect residents for the rest of their lives. Town of Enfield Wind Farm Advisory Committee Meeting – April 5, 2016 - Enfield Community Building 5 Laurie Shaver of 147 Connecticut Hill Road stated she has been to all the Advisory and Town Board meetings regarding the wind turbine project. She wondered how Frank Pavia, Harris Beach and Labella Engineers being paid by the BOWF are supposed to be represented the Town of Enfield. Robert Lisk of 567 Harvey Hill Road asked if people were aware of the effects of vertigo in regard to living near the wind turbines. He feels this is a health issue. He spoke about the snow fall and lake effect that the area receives and how this will affect the wind turbines. He wondered why he never heard about the Good Neighbor Agreement as he lives only one mile away from the wind turbine project. He pointed out the fact that the roads (county) have not been maintained in the area. He was told the reason was the wind farm project. He wondered about the profits for the BOWF and how will the corporation buying into the project treat the community. He feels that Solar is better for the area. He also wondered about the height of towers compared to the height of buildings. He also spoke about the cost of the fire company which goes back to the town then the tax payers. Joline Carlisle of Black Oak Road reported she was asked to sign the Good Neighbor agreement. She took the agreement to her attorney who told her it was worthless and not to sign it. Michael Miles adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sue Thompson, Recording Secretary