01-02-07: At a special meeting of the Wethersfield Town Board, Noble Environmental Power submitted its application for the Wethersfield Windpark, stating that the project would include 59 turbines in Wethersfield and 26 in the Town of Eagle - 6 more turbines than originally planned.
12-19-06: The The Arcade Herald reports that Highway Superintendent Randy Williams updated the town board on the wind farm project during its December 14 meeting, saying that he had been meeting weekly with Noble Environmental Power and plans were moving ahead. According to Williams, Noble has started work on their substation off Cadwell Road and installing the lines to Arcade's Freedom substation will be started this winter. Noble also plans to get access roads and culverts planned so they can begin construction in the spring, or before, weather permitting. The company will use several town roads for transportation of necessary materials and equipment - including Cadwell, South Lyonsburg, Wing Street, Centerville, Telegraph and portions of Bray and Washburn roads.
"They have agreed to maintain them and repair any damages, " Williams said. "They'll do a pre-construction inspection and beef up the culverts before they use them."
Williams said that if Hanson Concrete gets the contract for pouring the footers for the windmills, it will set up a portable concrete plant near the town's salt storage building.
10-18-06: The Wyoming County Industrial Development Agency (WCIDA) board of directors approved terms for a Payment-In-Lieu-Of-Taxes (PILOT) agreement with the Noble Bliss Wind Farm.
Click here for Arcade Herald article outlining the terms.
09-0-06: Eagle Town Board ignores County Planning Board recommendation for changes and spells out special use permit requirements (see article here).
08-07-06: The Wyoming County Planning Board held a meeting to discuss the site review for the Eagle Project. The board determined that the site review needed modification and submitted a dozen or more suggestions for changes with their decision.
07-26-06: At the Wyoming County Planning Board meeting earlier this month, the planning board had Noble's DEIS for the Town of Eagle in for a referral. Mr. Tindell announced that the planning board would take the whole 30 days allowed to read it and scheduled a public meeting to discuss the DEIS on July 18th. The public meeting was cancelled a few days prior, according to Mr. Tindell, because the Town of Eagle withdrew the referral.
05-17-06:
ENB - REGION 9 NOTICE: "The Town Board of the Town of Eagle, as lead agency, has accepted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed Wind Mill Project. Written comments on the Draft EIS will be accepted until May 31, 2006. The action involves the construction and operation of an approximately 100 megawatt (MW) wind energy park in the Town of Eagle, including the installation and operation of 67 wind turbines within an approximately 5071- acre area, construction and use of 16 miles of access roads, construction and use of an electrical collection system with approximately 11 miles of overhead lines and 18 miles of underground lines, construction and use of a new substation on a 1.5-acre parcel that will tie into an existing 115-kV line, and construction and use of a 5.5 mile overhead transmission line that will connect to the newly constructed substation and an existing substation in the Town of Arcade, NY."
05-01-06:
Excerpt From the Arcade Herald article April 26:
"Although Noble Environmental plans to begin construction of a turbine wind farm in the Town of Eagle late this summer, the town board still has not approved the company's Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the project.
The Eagle Town Board was to meet on April 27 to go over the document with its consulting firm Hancock and Esterbrook. (Town expenses related to the project are being paid through an escrow fund provided by Noble.)
"There are a lot of clarifications that have to be made," said Supervisor Joseph Kushner of the document.
The town board is acting as lead agency in the review of the proposed project, which includes installing up to 67 wind turbines in the town. The project will have to comply with town law, and a host community agreement will have to be established before construction can begin."
Subject to Fair Use Policy.
New Eagle board member excluded from wind turbine issues
By: Judy Kessler-Rix March 14, 2006
"The newest member of the Eagle Town Board has agreed to provide the board with a letter of disclosure regarding her association with Noble Environmental, a wind energy development company planning a wind farm in the township.
The wind company has applied under town law to install up to 67 wind turbines in Eagle. The Bliss Wind Park will be done in two stages, one they hope to begin this spring, and the second in 2007. The Town of Eagle will act as lead agency for the project. The town, however, still has no host community agreement with Noble, and has hired consultants to help work out a financial package.
Councilman Diana Henry, who was sworn in during the board's organizational meeting, is one of several landowners who have contracted to lease property to Noble.
She told the board during its March meeting that she tried to get a letter together, but it didn't sound quite right, so she asked the town attorney to help. Henry openly agreed to recuse herself from voting on the issue.
"Is that all activities regarding Noble Environmental, including executive sessions?" asked Supervisor Joseph Kushner. "I just want that to go on the record."
ACCORDING TO Attorney Robert Freemen, executive director of the NYS Committee on Open Government, General Municipal Law requires board members to make a full disclosure of any contracts or dealings with corporations or individuals doing business with the town.
'You tell the world,' Freemen said, 'so there is no appearance of wrongdoing.'
He added, however, that Councilman Henry could remain during any executive session, regardless of her association with Noble. 'The law is clear that every board member has the right to be present during an executive session,' Freemen said.
During the March meeting, Kushner asked for a brief executive (closed) session to discuss 'the finances of a specific corporation.'
Councilman Henry was asked to leave the meeting room, along with the audience, leading to the assumption that the company was Noble Environmental.
After the meeting, Henry said that she had asked the board in February to pay a $150 voucher for a training session for new board members she attended in January. Although the town requires board pre-approval for training, she said she received the paperwork too late for the board meeting prior to the date of the session.
'I called board members but they didn't want to commit to an answer,' Henry said.
'I did what I felt was in the best interest of the town. I didn't even charge mileage. I think that not paying it was discriminatory'"...
10-19-06: At the regular Town board meeting, Keith Pitman of Empire State Wind Energy, Inc. addressed the board with the company's desire to offer an alternative wind project. According to Mr. Pitman, Empire only wants to build projects that will be acceptable to the community as a whole and will pay the full tax on their turbines, eliminating a PILOT agreement, lessening the burden on taxpayers and leaving substantially more money in the Town than Invenergy has offered. Supervisor John Knab (whose brother-in-law has signed up for turbines with Invenergy) only agreed to allow Mr. Pitman 5 minutes to speak. In closing, Mr. Pitman announced Empire's intention to seek land rights in the Town of Sheldon. It was reported days later that Invenergy was suddenly trying to secure more easements in Sheldon, offering some landowners thousands of dollars up front to sign boundary agreements.
09-26-06: The Sheldon Town Board has formed a committee that will determine the terms of a host community agreement with Invenergy, as well as how these potential revenues will be spent. Invenergy announced it has offered a host community agreement and PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) that would provide the town with approximately $805,000 for the next 20 years, based on 86 turbines that will produce up to 1.5 megawatts each. Once a host community agreement is finalized with the town, Invenergy will submit a PILOT agreement to the Wyoming County IDA.
08-01-06: Special meeting at 7:00 pm at the Varysburg elementary school for public comment on Invenergy's DEIS for the High Sheldon Wind project.
After verbally recusing himself from voting on the turbine issue, board member Jim Fontaine has since been advised by Sheldon Town Attorney Anthony Di Fillipio that, "in his opinion", Mr. Fontaine can vote on all but his own cluster of turbines. Since Fontaine's cluster of turbines is unable to stand alone as a viable project in itself and must be included with the rest of the clusters to be feasible, it's a mystery as to how this isn't a conflict of interest.
Councilman Glenn Cramer has repeatedly expressed his concern about the flawed DEIS submitted by Invenergy and requested that the board sit down as a group, go over it thoroughly and get whatever professional help they need to understand it completely. The board outvoted him 4 to 1 and agreed to accept the DEIS as complete.
Subject to Fair Use Policy.
Consultant reports on Sheldon wind farm project
March 28, 2006
Source: Arcade Herald
By: Judy Kessler-Rix
"Michael J. Flanigan, an environmental scientist with Stantec Consulting of Rochester, appeared at the March 21 meeting of the Sheldon Town Board to report on a recent scoping hearing for the proposed High Sheldon Wind Farm.
Flanigan, who was hired by the town to assist the board, which is acting as lead agency, said he would be considering the concerns presented at a March 14 public hearing, along with several letters he received, in preparing the scoping document for Invenergy's Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).
Invenergy is planning to install approximately 86 wind turbines which will be located on two high ridges in Sheldon, one along Route 20A, and another near Maxon Road. The town board, as lead agency for the project, has hired Flanigan to list the issues of concern that should be included in the scoping document. Once the scoping issues are determined, Invenergy will have to address them in its DEIS. Once the DEIS is complete, the town will review it to see if it is complete, and another public hearing will be held.
The board has until April 2 to have the scoping document in place. Otherwise, the scope of the study will be determined by the developer.
'We have eight pages of notes [from the March 14 meeting],' Flanigan said. 'Many of the comments are duplicates. All the topics raised so far will be addressed in the DEIS.' He added that it is up to the board to review and finalize the scoping document.
Flanigan told the board that the document should be ready for its review by Friday afternoon, March 24, or on Monday, March 27. The board scheduled a meeting for March 30, at 7:30 p.m. to make its final review.
THE ISSUE OF a wind farm has been the subject of some controversy in the town. Residents concerned about the long-term effects of the project, and aesthetic issues, have questioned the project. In addition, some are concerned that a 2003 wind energy law enacted by the town does not contain enough protection for residents.
Proponents of the project argue that in addition to providing renewable 'green' energy, it will bring economic benefits to Sheldon; both to the landowners who lease their property and the town and school districts through a host community agreement and PILOT program.
Board member Jim Fontaine is one of the landowners who have been approached by Invenergy, and has verbally agreed to recuse himself from any voting on the issue."
February 15, 2006
Source: Arcade Herald
The Town of Sheldon has received permission from the state Department of Environmental Conservation to act as the lead agency for a proposed wind energy conversion system project in the town.
The wind turbines will be located in clusters on ridges along Route 20A and 77, as well as Maxon Road, with a total of more than 85 turbines planned. Sheldon Town Clerk Gertrude Hyman reported during the board's January 17 meeting that she had received a special use permit application from Invenergy for the final and 12th cluster of wind turbines.
A letter from the DEC also listed the departments that would have jurisdiction over the state environmental quality review (SEQR) process, and listed issues that need to be considered for each cluster of the project.
These include the turbines' effect on birds and bats, visual impacts, impacts on natural resources and wildlife, their effect on cultural and archeological resources, and on oil and gas mining rights.
During the meeting, the board passed a resolution naming the town as lead agency and issued a "positive declaration" regarding the project. This means that they believe the wind system could have a significant impact on the surrounding environment. Invenergy is now required to prepare a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS). The town will also review the company's environmental assessment form, with the understanding that the town board, as part of the scoping process, may identify additional significant impacts caused by the project.
Company representative Eric Miller said that Invenergy will be setting up a web site with information on the project. In addition, a map display in the town hall entryway shows the proposed location of the wind turbines.
MEANWHILE, a group of residents in the targeted areas have brought a lawsuit against the town, charging that a 2003 town law regulating wind development is inadequate.
Town attorney Anthony DiFilippo reported he had received notice from the group's attorney that they would be appealing a lower court's decision that the suit is without merit.
The town has contacted several engineering firms to act on the town's behalf regarding the wind turbine project. The cost of the consulting engineers will be paid by the developer.
Following a discussion on the three firms that applied, the board set up a special meeting to interview two of the companies before making a decision.
The board also approved a request from Supervisor John Knab to set up an escrow account with Invenergy, to cover legal and engineering expenses connected with the wind energy conversion project."
#1) Invenergy Wind, LLC
Buffalo Road Wind Farm, 165 MW
Date entered in NYSIO interconnection queue -2/23/05
In-service: 2007/09
#2) Invenergy Buffalo Rd. Windfarm 2
165 MW
withdrawn from interconnection queue
Orangeville Wind
New York Windpower
96MW
withdrawn from interconnection queue
12-27-06: At the Town Board's year end meeting on Wednesday December 27 at 11:00 am, the board passed their local law governing wind turbines in the Town. No public discussion was allowed prior to the vote.
After unanimously passing the law, it was announced by the Town Attorney that he'd spoken with candidates for the position of engineering firm for the Town and an Attorney to work as Special Counsel, explaining that he's "just a country practioner." Representatives from Conestoga_Rovers & Associates (CRA) were present and Buffalo Attorney Daniel Spitzer arrived shortly afterward. Mr. Spitzer is working for approximately 16 towns in NY where wind projects are proposed, some of them Noble's. CRA has worked for the Towns of Altona, Clinton, Ellenburg and Eagle - also Noble projects. They were the only applicants present. Their fees, if hired, will be paid by Noble, through an escrow account with the Town. The board scheduled a special meeting for January 2 to "consider their options" before filling the positions.
12-11-06: (Updated 01-09-07) On December 11, the Board made only minor changes to the draft law, claiming that their seasonal residence description in the law was "misconstrued" and that they "didn't mean for Faun Lake to be slighted". Under SECTION IV (H), the description of a residence has been changed to include "a house, apartment or other shelter that is the usual residence of a person, family or household that has county approved water, sewer and electric, or a combination thereof, at the adoption of this local law. A place where one actually lives as distinguished from a domicile or place of temporary sojourn, such as, but not limited to, a camper body on cinder blocks, a mobile home in the woods used as a hunting cabin or campsite." Under Section V (B) (1) (b) (ii) Set backs: the following language has been deleted: "A permanent liveable residence shall not include seasonal residences located within the Town" (this was pretty hard to "misconstrue"). The following text remains: "from any permanent, livable residence and/or building for public congregation that is on any parcel by a minimum distance of 1/4 mile, unless waived in writing, in the form of an easement that is recorded in the Wyoming County Clerk's Office, by the owners of such residence or building of public congregation.".
Since most Faun Lake taxpayers don't live at their sites as a "usual residence", it would seem they've deliberately been slighted again. There appears to be no set standard for what defines a residence in New York State, it seems the description needs to be defined at the Town level by local law. Wethersfield has no such law that we're aware of. Non-residents who own property in Wethersfield that isn't wide enough to accomodate the set backs and had future plans to build a home on it will essentially be cheated out of the opportunity to build their homes without being subjected to set backs and noise limits that were considered unnacceptable at other homes. Anyone whose home is in the process of being built, but hasn't yet received County approval on the septic and electric systems aren't likely to qualify for the 1320 foot set backs either, the way this is written.
Click here for the full text of the law.
November 30, 2006: A public meeting was held at the Fire Training Center for comments on the draft law. The Town Board received more letters and comments opposing the project than in favor of it. Of the letters and comments in favor, 2 of the authors were Noble employees and we believe all but one of the others has an easement with Noble.
When combined with the letters entered into the record at previous meetings, it should be obvious to the board that the people who are opposed to the project are not the "vocal minority", the ones in favor of it are. Interestingly, the most stated reasons for approving of the project were concern for improving our environment and/or reducing our foreign oil usage - the same unproven claims made by the developer. Not a single letter said "I want the money."
09-09-06: After rumors surfaced that Noble was telling landowners on the north side of Youngers Rd. that they wouldn't be getting any turbines because Noble was unable to get transmission access in that area, the Town Board changed the set backs being considered to 1320 feet from "permanent livable residences" and only 500 feet from property lines. When asked why they changed their minds on the set backs, Councilman Cummins said "we've had calls..." While discussion of the calls was going on, Supervisor Copeland stated (from a tape of the meeting) "we would've lost half the turbines." This was later innaccurately recorded in what is still (as of 01-04-07) a draft copy of the meeting minutes as "Supervisor Copeland replied that they made changes due to phone calls from residents and property owners."
07-10-06: The Wethersfield Town Board, when asked repeatedly why they don't just wait to see the turbines in the Town of Eagle, since there's 5 months left on our moratorium, declined to answer. When a survey of residents was suggested, Councilman Dembowski stated that it was a good idea, but the rest of the board was silent. According to Supervisor Copeland, the board is considering set backs between 1000 and 1500 feet from homes. Residents asked how they could make a law regulating 400 foot turbines without knowing what 80 of them in a small town looks and sounds like and Supervisor Copeland stated "I guarantee we will all visit Tug Hill before the draft law gets brought out."
06-12-06: Supervisor Copeland announced that the draft local law to regulate industrial turbines would be ready next month, the board just needed to "tweak a couple things." When asked if any of the board members had visited a wind "farm" yet, as they'd said they would in May, all replied that they hadn't. When asked if they'd given their input on the local law, including setbacks, they replied that they had. Noble employees, who'd been seen visiting some board members homes the previous week, arrived at the meeting driving identical white trucks and had consultants conducting soil tests in the town the following day, giving the appearance that they know something we don't.
03-31-06: Noble Environmental Power, according to town board meeting minutes from September of 2005, had claimed to be proposing 67-70 turbines for the town. At their "informational" meeting on March 30th, 2006 (at which we weren't allowed to speak), they claimed to be proposing 86 turbines. We quoted the number from the board minutes to be safe but were aware that the Wethersfield project has been in the interconnection queue at 129 MW since it was first entered.
Noble Environmental Power, LLC, a subsidiary of J.P. Morgan Partners, has proposed to erect between 65 and 70 400 foot turbines in the town. The township is 36.1 square miles in total area. Noble has stated that due to the distance to the tie-in point to the electric grid, overhead power lines will be required in Wethersfield. This project is still in the early planning stages, but Noble has been approaching landowners about easements since the fall of 2004 and attending town board meetings since January 2005. The town board has enacted a 12 month moratorium on wind turbine construction until they can get some land use laws or equivalent in place, but are now asking for residents and landowners to send them their questions and concerns about the project in writing, postmarked no later than March 15th. There will be a public meeting on March 30th for Noble's representative to answer the 30 most asked questions.
Noble has seven projects planned for construction in 2006 and 2007, totaling more than 700 megawatts. Four of these projects are on schedule for completion in 2006 - Clinton, Ellenburg and Altona in the North Country, and Bliss in Wyoming County. All seven projects are currently in the New York State Independent System Operator's interconnection queue.
Genessee County
Batavia Wind Farm
Batavia Wind Farm, LLC
90.8 MW
In-service: 2007/12 - 2009/12
Bethany/Stafford:
At a special meeting on June 18, 2007, the Town of Stafford board voted 5-0 in favor of a law banning industrial turbines in the town.
UPC Wind Partners, LLC a limited liability corporation based in Massachusetts is the sister company of UPC Wind in Europe and has completed many of the currently operating large-scale wind projects around the world. UPC's Genesee Wind Farm (500 MW!), the world’s largest, on-shore wind-factory complex first appeared in New York's Independent System Operator (NYISO) Interconnection Queue in position #165. It was withdrawn for “Material change to request”, but has now reappeared as #203 with an expected online date of 10/2008. The proposed siting is an upside-down 'U' north-south along East Rd and along Bethany Center Rd, with the two lines arching together just south of Rt 63. There is an offshoot heading toward Little Canada and another along Brown Rd.
Erie County
In Sardinia, 40 miles southeast of Buffalo, developers lost interest in a $50 million wind farm after facing "very vocal" opposition from residents, a project representative said. Another report in the news mentioned that Zihlka ran out of money and yet another stated that the winds weren't adequate in Sardinia. Zihlka has since been bought by Horizon Wind Energy.
Horizon also announced plans to erect 13 turbines in the Town of North Collins, with an anticipated construction date of 2009-2010. No news on this project lately.
Cattaraugus County
08-10-06: The Arcade Herald reported that the Town Board of Farmersville received a report from Supervisor Zuech on Noble Environmental Power's decision to place a wind energy test tower at the property owned by Dean Roblee and their plans to find three or four more locations; and a Noble representative did not follow through on plans to visit Holmes and Millard Brown to explore possibilities for test towers at those locations. On the meeting agenda for August 21 is a review of a draft "land use" ordinance that was written by a board-appointed committee last winter as the third attempt to bring zoning to the town.
06-20-06: The Buffalo News reported that Noble Environmental Power, the Connecticut firm that is considering Eagle, Wethersfield and Centerville for construction of more than 200 wind turbines, has also erected test towers in Farmersville and Rushford.
Machias Windfarm, LLC
90 MW
In-service 11/07
No news on the Machias Windfarm since July of 2005. Horizon Wind Energy (new owner of Zihlka) had also announced plans to install up to 13 turbines over approximately 2,500 acres of land in the Town of Ashford, but no news on this project lately either.
Fair Use applies
Zilkha reps visit Yorkshire to "touch base"
By: Leslie Baldwin July 27, 2005
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14929170&BRD=2094&PAG=461&dept_id=412467&rfi=8
Talk of windmills hasn't waned at all in the Town of Yorkshire, as representatives of Zilkha Renewable Energy attended the town's July board meeting. The reason for the impromptu visit was "to let the town know we're still very interested in this area," said Project Manager Greg Kemmis, who flew in from Albany with several other representatives.
According to local project manager P.J. Saliterman, the Albany representatives (and one from Texas) just happened to be in the area reviewing all the Western New York projects and took the opportunity to touch base with Yorkshire.
"We wanted to engage the town on the issue of wind farms and talk about having a workshop to informally discuss zoning issues," Saliterman explained.
Kemmis said Zilkha is "really excited about the potential for this project."
The plans include the installation of at least 30 windmills over approximately 4,000 acres of land leased from property owners in the towns of Yorkshire and Machias.
"We're getting a lot of good response from landowners," added Kemmis.
According to Saliterman, he hopes to be present at the next meeting to keep the town apprised of developments, and he said he would like to help the public better understand the development of such a project.
"We want to help folks understand that we're not just arbitrarily drawing lines and dots on maps," Saliterman explained, "There are a lot of preliminary steps that must be taken."
Chatauqua County
Fair Use applies
Windmill deal is dead, says power agency
By ELMER PLOETZ
Buffalo News Southtowns Bureau
12/16/2005
The New York Power Authority announced almost 21/2 years ago that it had received the OK to proceed with "final negotiations" and execute an agreement with Chautauqua Windpower to buy electricity. The deal was supposed to kick in last Jan. 1 and extend for 10 years, but it apparently never got off the ground, and now the Power Authority is no longer interested.
Power Authority spokesman Michael Saltzman confirmed Thursday that the two entities never reached an agreement. "They weren't able to obtain the necessary permits, so we've moved onto other arrangements," Saltzman said. "We are no longer in negotiation with Chautauqua Windpower."
That's the second big blow to the proposed 34-turbine wind project overlooking Lake Erie in Westfield and Ripley. Earlier this fall, the company confirmed that it had lost its $3 million grant from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority because of lack of progress.
The project was expected to produce about 50 megawatts of electricity, enough to provide energy for about 16,500 homes. The Power Authority was prepared to buy half of the power.
Jasper Energy - Chautauqua Windpower's parent company - emerged from York Energy's bankruptcy in 2002 and picked up York's interests in the Chautauqua project. But the company has struggled with the permit process in the face of opposition from groups concerned about the effects of putting 300-foot high towers with rapidly spinning blades along the ridge overlooking the lake. It's a major flight path for migratory birds. "This project would have cost well over $50 million to build, but the developer appears to have been unable to raise $2.5 million. That might indicate how ineffective the company has been at selling the project to investors," a statement from the Chautauqua County Citizens for Responsible Wind Power said.
Saltzman said the Power Authority had also failed to reach a deal with Windfarm Prattsburgh, the other windfarm it had selected for power in 2003.
Instead, Saltzman said, it was committed to getting 75 megawatts of power from Horizon Wind Energy, co-developer of the Maple Ridge wind project in Lewis County.
For details and updates, see the Chatauqua County Citizens For Responsible Wind Power website.
Updates will be posted as they become available
