Logan County ZBA recommends Whitney Hill project approval conditional use with variances

 

[March 15, 2019] 

On Wednesday, March 12, the Logan County Zoning Board of Appeals held the second part of a public hearing on the Whitney Hill wind farm. The project is planned near Mount Pulaski to consider whether to recommend approval of the conditional use permit and two variance requests.

This project is the second phase of the HillTopper wind project currently in operation.

ZBA members present were Chairman Doug Thompson, Cheryl Baker, Bret Farmer, John Fulton and Scott Noltensmeier.

At a hearing Thursday, March 7, Matt Birchby of Swift Current Energy and Kyle Barry, attorney for the project, shared basic information about the plans. Birchby has been working with the HillTopper project since it started, and Barry is the attorney for both projects.

Barry said the ZBA would be voting on three separate items, the conditional use permit and two variance requests. One request is for sound variance from a landowner whose towers will exceed sound thresholds. The other is an agricultural zone variance because the portion where the turbine will be located is in an area zoned special district.

After Birchby’s presentation, Barry had witnesses share results of a sound study, wildlife studies, property value studies, and decommissioning plans.

Public comments included concerns about adverse health effects, noise, communications interference, broken tiles, and road damages.

Due to lateness of hour, the meeting of March 5th was adjourned.

Moving forward to March 12th, the ZBA reconvened to discuss the findings and to address and decide whether to recommend approval of the conditional use and variance requests.

First, the ZBA considered whether the plan met certain conditional use criteria.

One criterion is that the use “will not be substantially detrimental to and endanger public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare” and factors considered include sound (noise), traffic, and vibration.

Thompson said the noise levels meet the state ordinance according to the witness who did the noise studies. There were public concerns that the noise is problem for humans and animals.

ZBA members had questions about how long studies take, what is involved, why a noise study is not done at the ground level and how to address complaints.

Birchby said pre- and post-construction studies use a model and computer program and test turbines at maximum wind speeds. The model is based on actual turbine locations, what is put up, and there could be sound deviations due to location.

Baker asked whether there was an organization the homeowner could hire to examine the noise level reading, so the homeowner could back up their noise complaint.

There are sound consultants they could reach out to such as AWS Engineering, which Birchby said is the firm Swift Current Energy hired to do the tests. Wind analysis and sound analysis are what they do, and their studies are conservative because the financing party also uses them and wants to know they are not investing millions of dollars in something with sound issues.

Since the decommissioning plan is reviewed every ten years, Farmer asked if an on-site noise test might be done then.

Thompson said that could be very expensive and Birchby said it would take a long time to test all the turbines.

Logan County Zoning Officer Will D’Andrea said they could modify the conditions to recommend an on the ground study and Noltensmeier said the physical on the ground study would be doing “due diligence,” whether it be in six months or two years.

The post-construction noise study conducted for all primary structures within six months after the operation begins does provide some review. Thompson read the condition that post-construction noise study shall “verify noise levels are in compliance with noise standards. If noise levels exceed standards, the applicant must provide mitigation at the primary structure to provide compliance.”

Noltensmeier said if there was a complaint about a tower, maybe they could have a year to do a physical study on the tower, but Baker said they might have everyone complaining about the tower, and she thinks after two years people will not hear them.

Living on a farm, Baker said tractors running and fans running, these noises may cover up some of the turbine noise.

D’Andrea said the issue is whether noise is compliant with the noise control board levels.

If people have a complaint about the noise, Birchby said they should first call operations manager Chad Little who can check if something is wrong. Second, they would talk to the county board and see about having more studies done. Finally, if all else fails, they could go to the Illinois Pollution Control Board.

Thompson said he has gone to the Illinois Pollution Control Board and asked them about sound complaints and there were none at that point in time.

Fulton said the steps in the process after a complaint could lead to a physical process.

Thompson said the County Board must address possible failures and asked if would cover it. Failures and not fixing them could lead to fines.

Birchby said the county has right to expect tools for compliance.

Barry said the Illinois Pollution Control Board has formal hearings and he has reviewed other noise complaints, but none involving wind.

One addition the ZBA is suggesting is for the Logan County Board to “consider a method of addressing possible failures of any Wind Energy Conversion System project applicant to apply with a condition of the application that may occur after the project has become operational.” The operator will need to respond in thirty days and if they do not respond within that time, the County Board may impose a penalty or fine.

Though just a suggestion to the board, Thompson said it could put some teeth to problems that occur and thought noise exceeding allowable limits could fall in that category.

Another criterion is that “the conditional use will not be substantially injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted nor substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood.”

Baker said real estate values for properties near Railsplitter have held their own with houses in the country selling for $250,000 to $300,000 dollars and it increases the value of farmland if there is an operational tower.

Noltensmeier said he has a hard time grasping that anything built next to a property does not affect the value and is not sure sales will hold up years from now.

Thompson said Pete Polletti, who did the real estate study, has been doing studies for years and finds no significant differences in property values.

There have been concerns about broken tiles, and Noltensmeier said it can cause others down the road to have drainage issues when a tile is not fixed. He does not want this adverse effect to be devastating to people.

With the drainage tile plan, Birchby said they are obligated to fix them forever and they have been continuously working to resolve this issue.

The third criterion considered was whether “The establishment of the conditional use will not substantially impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district.”

During aerial applications, the applicant must shut down the turbine blades, so Thompson said that is addressed. The blades are turned off and in a certain direction to not create and obstruction.

If approved by the FAA, an aircraft detection system will shut off the lights at night if there are no planes around and Birchby said likelihood of approval is “extremely high.”

The fourth criterion considered is whether “Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage or necessary facilities have been or will be provided.”

Thompson said some of these are addressed under other requirements.

The final criterion is that “Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.”

Noltensmeier said he feels they need to have a condition that roads are ready before beginning construction because Primm Road was a disaster.

D’Andrea said there were lessons learned from that experience.

They were assured by Birchby that things will be done differently this time and they have “added teeth” to make sure everything goes smoother. The roads will be improved and strengthened before construction starts and heavy equipment only used on adequate roads. The egress is addressed by road use agreements.

Limiting construction activity between the hours of sunrise and sunset is intended to help with some issues, too.

Fulton asked about the issues with that a HillTopper and D’Andrea said that has been addressed.

Concrete pouring can be done in the evenings, but D’Andrea said no road work, moving cranes, or other construction may be done.

Two additional conditions were suggested by the ZBA.

One is the applicant cooperates with the National Weather Service in Lincoln to mitigate adverse effects wind turbines may have upon the ability of the NEXRAD radar to detect high winds, hail, tornado, and flash floods.

Mitigation of effects “may require operational curtailment of part or all of the wind farm under certain weather scenarios. It might also involve the sharing of real-time meteorological data from the wind farm turbines or ‘met’ towers.”

The other condition the ZBA suggests adding is the one they talked about earlier in the evening about addressing complaints within a thirty-day time frame and imposing a fine or penalty on the applicant if it is not remedied within that time.

After discussions of the conditions, the ZBA voted on whether to recommend approval of the conditional use permit and the variances. The ZBA just makes recommendations on the conditional use and the board makes the final decision. The variances are granted by the ZBA.

Baker motioned to approve the conditional use permit adding conditional conditions.

This motion passed 4 - 1 with Noltensmeier voting no.

The variances were due to “unique circumstances” created by the layout of the farm.

One variance is for noise on one property and Birchby said the towers exceed noise thresholds by less than two decibels only at nighttime. The owners have consented to the noise.

Noltensmeier motioned to approve the noise variation and the vote was unanimous.

The other variance was for the special use district with a flood plain on the parcel. D’Andrea said turbines are not allowed in special use districts otherwise and the applicant must get the appropriate state permit to work in a flood plain.

Baker’s motions to approve the variance for the special use district was also unanimously approved.

The ZBA’s recommendations for approval was brought before the County Board for discussion at the board workshop and be will be voted on at their regular board meeting on Tuesday, March 19.

[Angela Reiners]