Library filed under Zoning/Planning from USA

Rancher describes experiences associated with wind farms

Rose Bacon, member of the Governor's Energy Task Force and a rancher who owns property in the Flint Hills, spoke about the vulnerability of communities facing proposals from international companies that want to build commercial wind farms in rural areas. She pointed to the lack of “teeth” in regulations, and the attractive tax write-offs granted to wind energy companies, and the inexperience of local officials in dealing with such monstrous deals, depicting a state-wide scenario akin to the “wildcatter days in the oil business.”
1 Nov 2005

Rancher describes experiences associated with wind farms

Rose Bacon, member of the Governor's Energy Task Force and a rancher who owns property in the Flint Hills, spoke about the vulnerability of communities facing proposals from international companies that want to build commercial wind farms in rural areas. She pointed to the lack of “teeth” in regulations, and the attractive tax write-offs granted to wind energy companies, and the inexperience of local officials in dealing with such monstrous deals, depicting a state-wide scenario akin to the “wildcatter days in the oil business.”
1 Nov 2005

Planning for Wind Power Developments in Hilltown Communities

Planning_for_wind_power_developments__2_1__thumb The Hawley Wind Study Committee was established by town meeting vote and was directed to issue a report to the selectmen. Interested citizens were asked to submit a letter of interest to selectmen who then selected the committee. The committee first examined potential positive financial benefits to the town. Community based wind development was explored for a piece of town-owned land with the assistance of the UMass Renewable Energy Resource Lab. The committee determined that development of the site was not feasible. Lengthily discussions on the associated various negative impacts of wind plants followed. It was determined that our current bylaws would not require any form of local review to minimize these impacts. A report outlining the above was provided to the selectmen concluding that the appropriate course of action was to establish a wind power bylaw.
1 Nov 2005

Reply Submitted By The Kingdom Commons Group to Vermont's Public Service Board re. East Haven

Response_to_prop_fof_and_col_1__thumb There is no question in this proceeding that EMDC bears the burden of proof with regard to each of the criteria for a Certificate of Public Good ("CPG") under 30 V.S.A. Section 248. See In Re: Petition of Tom Halnon, 174 Vt 514; 811A. 2d 161, (August 20, 2002); Petition of Vermont Gas Systems, Inc., Docket No. 5314 at p.17 (August 2, 1989); Petition of Champlain Pipeline Company, Docket No. 5300 at p. 32-33 (August 21, 1989); Petition of David and Jan Blittersdorf, CPG NM-11 at p. 3 (May 26, 2000). ("The Board has consistently held in cases under Section 248 that the burden of proof is on the applicant.")
27 Oct 2005

Proposed Hawley (MA) Wind Facility Bylaw

The purposes of this wind-generated energy production facilities section are to: A. Protect the scenic, historic, environmental, and natural or man-made resources of the community without prohibiting alternative energy technologies to be developed. B. Provide standards and requirements for regulation, placement, construction, monitoring, design, modification and removal of wind facilities. C. Provide a procedural basis for action within a reasonable period of time for request for authorization to place, construct, operate, or modify wind facilities. D. Preserve property values. E. Locate wind facilities so that they do not have negative impacts such as, but not limited to, attractive nuisance, noise, falling objects, general safety, welfare and quality of life, wildlife and the environment in the community. F. Require owners of wind facilities to configure them so as to minimize and mitigate the adverse impact of the wind facilities.
27 Oct 2005

Jurisdictional Ruling by Vermont's Environmental Board

Jurisdictionalopinion2-227_thumb The Windham Regional Commission asked the District Environmental Commission if the proposed commercial wind energy development on Glebe Mountain requires an an Act 250 amendment as well as a permit under Section 248 (30 V.S.A Section 248). Act 250 is designed to protect Vermont's ridgelines above 2500'. Section 248 authorizes the Public Service Board to issue 'Certificates of Public Good' for electricity generating projects. The District Environmental Commission concluded that construction of the wind measurement towers and the proposed wind energy project represent material and substantial changes to existing Act 250 permits and thus require an amendment.
6 Oct 2005

Londonderry Town Plan

Culminating three years of study, the Planning Commission of Londonderry (VT) revised Londonderry's Town Plan to prohibit industrial wind turbines on Glebe Mountain. The revised Town Plan was submitted to the Londonderry Select Board on August 30, 2005 and approved by the Select Board on October 5, 2005. Included here are selected themes and extracts from Londonderry's Town Plan.
30 Aug 2005

Residents Bring Lawsuit Challenging Town Of Sheldon's Wind Energy Law

The Declaratory Judgment action...asks the court to nullify Sheldon's Wind Energy Law as inconsistent with the town's Comprehensive Plan. The lawsuit also claims that the Sheldon Town Board exceeded its lawful authority by granting itself, rather than the Town's Zoning Board of Appeals, the "sole and absolute discretion" to grant variances relating to set-back requirements, noise levels, and the total number of wind towers allowed.
24 Aug 2005

Friction over forest

It's not easy to strike a balance, and that's where the friction arises. In Vermont, it is playing out as the U.S. Forest Service is faced with delivering a new management plan for the Green Mountain National Forest, a 400,000-acre parcel of public land in central and southern Vermont.
21 Aug 2005

Wind Power in Pennsylvania: It Isn’t Easy Being Green

The generation of electricity by wind is a growing industry in Pennsylvania. While wind energy is certainly an attractive alternative to the pollution produced by fossil fuel power plants, all potential environmental impacts must be measured if electricity produced this way is to truly qualify as “green energy.” Surprisingly, only minimal environmental studies need to be done to site a wind farm in Pennsylvania. Improper siting of some wind farms in the U.S. has impacted migratory bird, resident bird, and bat populations. We present bird-impaction data from an industrial facility 30 km south of a proposed wind farm in Luzurne County, Pennsylvania, that suggest caution in the blind embrace of this energy technology. Siting decisions are made at the local government levels and are primarily based on economic incentives. We argue (a) that this energy alternative must incorporate robust site-specific impaction studies at each wind farm to demonstrate effects throughout the Commonwealth, and (b) that local government officials be given the guidance necessary to encourage and provide environmental oversight to wind farms in their areas.
1 Jul 2005

Wind Farms: Frequently Asked (Legal) Questions

In community after community where industrial-scale "wind farms" have been proposed, mundane and sparsely-attended board meetings have been transformed into standing-room-only affairs. Residents and property owners are anxious to know whether rumored plans to construct twenty, fifty or even a hundred of the 400-foot tall wind turbines are "a done deal." Most significantly, the electorate wants to know the extent to which their town has the power to decide whether or not wind farms will dominate their rural landscape. /p
30 Jun 2005

http://www.windaction.org/posts?location=USA&p=316&topic=Zoning%2FPlanning
back to top