Logan County ZBA recommends
Whitney Hill project approval conditional use with variances
Send a link to a friend
[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.
[to top of second column] |
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] |