Logan County Board approves Whitney Hill Wind Project near Mount Pulaski

 

[March 21, 2019] 

LINCOLN 

On Tuesday, March 19, the Logan County Board held their Regular monthly meeting to vote on motions and hear committee updates. One focus of discussion was the approval of the Whitney Hill Wind Farm Project near Mount Pulaski.

Members present were Board Chairman Emily Davenport, Vice chairman Scott Schaffenacker, Kevin Bateman, Dave Blankenship, Janet Estill, Bob Farmer, David Hepler, Steve Jenness, Chuck Ruben, Bob Sanders, Annette Welch and newly appointed member Jim Wessbecher.

Whitney Hill is the second phase of the HillTopper Wind Farm Project that was constructed last fall.

Both the Logan County Regional Planning Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed and recommended the Logan County Board move forward with Whitney Hill requests to build.

Planning and Zoning Committee Chairman David Hepler made a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit for the Whitney Hill Wind Farm.

Swift Current Energy’s project manager and director Matt Birchby and the attorney for the project Kyle Barry previously shared information about the plans at the board workshop Thursday, March 14.

Birchby said this project is one-third the size of the HillTopper project and will utilize up to 26 two-megawatt turbines. These turbines will be the same number of megawatts as the ones at HillTopper, but the rotor is a bit wider and the hub height a bit lower. The tip height will be 499 feet above ground.

Starting at the southern portion of HillTopper, Birchby said it will operate as one seamless wind farm.

The timeline for starting construction is the beginning of May and Birchby said they will strengthen the roads first, especially since there was damage to roads that had not been strengthened before the HillTopper construction began. They are almost done with the road use agreement and traffic analysis.

Birchby said the Whitney Hill Project is a $100 million project that will bring in between $236,939 and $256,913 in permit fees to the county and $400,000 per year in property taxes. The would also be $16 M in payments made to participating landowners over the 30-year course of the project and $2.2 M will be paid to non-participating landowners. Birchby said non-participating landowners within 3,000 feet of a turbine will receive $1,000 a year and there are about 45 homes within 3,000 feet.

Swift Current Energy is working on getting approval from the FAA to deploy an Aircraft Detection Lighting System to shut off lights when no aircraft are detected and Birchby said in one location, they are off 98 percent of the time at night.

During the public comment time, the board heard from Rich Cannon, who lives in Mount Pulaski. Cannon has $7 M worth of farmland and said he will have to move due to HillTopper Wind Farm’s hazardous effects such as shadow flicker, electromagnetic, radio and communications interference, vibrations, light turbulence, and infrasound. Cannon said these hazards will ruin his life and farmland.

Cannon said leaseholders cannot tell about these effects, but he is no longer a leaseholder. He said the contracts list the hazardous effects. Cannon knows the wind farms are approved because of the money, but said some like him get sick from the effects.

Tuesday, Hepler made a motion to approve the conditional use permit for the Whitney Hill Wind Farm.

Hepler then said he wanted to amend it to add Patrick Engineering as a consultant for the Decommissioning Plan. Hepler said the request came from Swift Current Energy and both D’Andrea and the State’s Attorney said it should be brought before the board.

Bateman asked if the decommissioning plan would go into effect at the start of construction.

Ruben said no, because they are not asking for waivers.

This amendment was approved 10-1-1.

Sanders voted no.

Schaffenacker abstained.

Bateman said he wanted to amend the motion, so work is not limited from sunrise to sunset except for what is prohibited in the road use agreement and the hauling of aggregate and building access lanes.

Since the board voted to allow Freer construction restraints for the Sugar Creek Wind Farm Project and Whitney Hill is an extension of HillTopper, Bateman said he thought Whitney Hill should be offered the same ability to do some nighttime construction.

Bateman’s amendment was approved 10-1-1.

Sanders voted no.

Schaffenacker abstained.

Since Whitney Hill is phase two of HillTopper, Schaffenacker asked about outstanding conditions at HillTopper that had not been met or any outstanding issues from the road use agreement that had not been resolved.

Logan County Zoning Officer Will D’Andrea said the conditions were all satisfied before construction permits were issued. Post-construction requirements like a follow-up noise study to verify compliance is still outstanding. In terms of issues, D’Andrea said there is work still being done to repair tile damage.

Logan County Highway Engineer Bret Aukamp said they are progressing on the road use agreement as expected for Whitney Hill’s construction phase and post-construction road improvements are being done at HillTopper.

As far as roadway plans for Whitney Hill, Aukamp said the roads have been improved, but several things still need to be addressed. They are working on punch list items, and after a break from doing repairs during the winter months, work will soon resume.

Schaffenacker asked whether that also referred to the post-construction noise study must be done after six months and what verification should be provided.

D’Andrea said the post-construction noise study must be done after a wind farm is in operation for six months to verify compliance. At the ZBA hearing, D’Andrea said the applicant explained the post-construction noise study re-runs the computer study of the proposed turbine model in the proposed locations done before construction, which surprised ZBA members.

Tower locations are issued based on compliance with setbacks and the noise study locations and D’Andrea said re-running the model will show the same results when the towers are in the same locations as the original study.

D’Andrea said if an on the ground field noise study is expected, different verification would be needed. He asked whether the intent for this noise study and whether it would be left to complaints afterwards or verification that what they proposed is what is out there.

Schaffenacker said he would like the operators to show that what is proposed matches an on the ground noise study.

Hepler asked Birchby what is usual and customary for these studies.

Birchby said they use the sound models for the post-construction noise study. The sound model used looks at each turbine at the maximum volume. The model tests noise levels up to an eight hertz threshold from all directions with a maximum wind speed rate and turbines at 360 degrees. Small changes made may have an adverse impact, so the study will test that.

A third-party engineer is used for the noise studies and the model is conservative. Birchby said the study shows equipment not moved for adverse effects and it is unheard of to do a study on every turbine. It would be very complicated and a major expense.

In New England, where Swift Current Energy has their main headquarters, Birchby said it would take over a year, often to get the right atmospheric conditions, just to study one turbine. Maximum wind speeds to demonstrate the loudest the turbine can be ascertained while having minimum ambient sound in the vicinity.

With all the trees in New England, Birchby said they would need low wind speeds on the ground and extremely high wind speeds 500 feet up. It could take a long time for this mix of conditions to happen.

Quarterly public meetings about the HillTopper project at Mount Pulaski’s American Legion Hall have allowed people to discuss concerns with Operations Manager Chad Little and Birchby said that would be one place sound complaints could be addressed. People in the area have Little’s number and can call Little at any time to help address the issue.

If complaints are not being addressed, Birchby said the next step would be to go to the County Board who can fine the company for non-compliance.

If the problem is still not resolved, the next step would be to go to the Illinois Pollution Control Board, but Birchby said that process is more complicated.

Schaffenacker said using the same model for the noise study does not allow for subjectivity.

Birchby said they use third party engineer USAWS to do the noise studies utilized by Swift Energy’s financing. Parties are investing hundreds of millions of dollars on the sound report’s accuracy.

Bateman said these studies would be hard to do on the ground with trees and other ambient sounds. Only a computer-generated model could measure the sound of the wind tower at maximum volume with highest winds from a 360-degree angle. He said several avenues help individuals with noise complaints needing mitigation.

Welch said she would rather the noise be tested at the highest possible levels versus an on the ground where it would be hard to get those levels.

Schaffenacker had a question about condition 38, which addresses enforcement for non-compliance.

D’Andrea said condition 38 is a recommended condition that came out of the ZBA and specifies that the county board can put in a “fine” system as a mechanism when complaints are not resolved.

Birchby asked the board to add a clause about being fined unless the project was working in good faith to resolve issues. He said drainage tile damages are a good example because the company is actively working to fix tiles.

If they are working on an issue and the county agrees they are actively working to correct the problem, Birchby said they should not be fined after thirty days. If they had no plan for working to fix a problem, Birchby agrees they should be fined.

Schaffenacker made an amendment to condition 38 to say if the failure extends beyond thirty days and “is not being actively or reasonably addressed by the operator,” then they will be fined.

The amendment passed with 11 yeses.

Wessbecher abstained.

Schaffenacker also wanted to add an amendment to change condition 33, and omit the line about an aerial application agreement “with non-participating landowners.” The wording would be replaced by “the applicant shall commit to an aerial application agreement and/or commitment letter for the benefit of the non-participating landowners within the project.” Now, they will not need an official signature from non-participating landowners.

D’Andrea said the way it was previously stated, if non-participating landowners did not sign it, the condition would not have been satisfied and project would not be able to move forward. Whitney Hill will be providing a commitment to the county and landowners that they are shutting down turbines during aerial applications.

Birchby said HillTopper provided a commitment letter to each of the non-participants in the project footprint stating the company would work with them to make sure they could have aerial applications sprayed on their land. The company is committed to shutting down turbines during aerial application, but the landowners need to provide twelve-hour notice.

Barry said the board had been concerned about forcing non-participating landowners to sign agreements.

The amendment to condition 33 passed with Jim Wessbecher abstaining and all others voting yes.

The main motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit for the Whitney Hill Wind Farm passed 9-2-1.

Bateman, Blankenship, Davenport, Estill, Farmer, Hepler, Jenness, Ruben and Welch voted yes.

Sanders and Schaffenacker voted no.

Wessbecher abstained.

[Angela Reiners]