| 
			 As the hearing began, Chairman Doug Thompson asked for a moment of 
			silence in memory of Dean Toohey, who passed away in December.  
			Toohey was a member of the ZBA since its initial creation until his 
			passing. 
			
			“We all had a great deal of respect for Dean, and we’re going to 
			miss him and the history that he was able to recall,” said Thompson. 
			
			After the moment of silence, the ZBA began their deliberations. 
			 
			
			Thompson explained that three votes will be needed to make any 
			recommendation to the Logan County Board.  On Tuesday, the Logan 
			County Board approved Judi Graff as a new member of the ZBA.  She 
			and other members, Doug Thompson as chairman, Rick Sheley, and Brett 
			Farmer were all present.  Zoning Officer Will D'Andrea was also 
			present. 
			
			The ZBA spent most of the hearing deliberating on various conditions 
			that can be applied to the permit.  As the project is an application 
			for a conditional use permit, this is one of the few instances in 
			which the county can attach conditions upon granting a request for 
			land use. 
			
			 
			
			Brett Farmer said he questioned whether or not some of the towers 
			would meet the required 1,000 foot setback from primary structures.  
			“A tower of that size may need more than 1,000 feet,” said Farmer.  
			Zoning Officer Will D’Andrea said that there are a number of towers 
			on the proposed map that would not meet the setback requirement, but 
			there are provisions to allow a waiver for those towers as one of 
			the conditions. 
			
			Farmer also asked how noise violations would be enforced and 
			reported.  D’Andrea said that the Illinois Pollution Control Board 
			can conduct a study should a violation be reported.  Additionally, 
			the county can require that louder towers be run with noise reducing 
			software, and that a study be conducted six months into their 
			operation to determine noise levels. 
			
			Thompson said there could be another condition attached concerning 
			weather service.  This condition would require Relight to sign an 
			agreement with the National Weather Service stating that Relight 
			would share weather data with the NWS should Doppler radar be 
			affected by the turbines. 
			
			Thompson said he was considering adding a condition that would 
			require Relight to assist landowners should communication channels 
			(such as phones, radios, televisions, GPS equipment) be negatively 
			impacted.  Judy Graff asked how it could be determined if the 
			turbines are causing any problems.  Thompson said he thinks it would 
			be up to the landowner to take it up with Relight and work out the 
			problem among themselves to the best of their ability. 
			
			“I don’t know how else we can do it,” said Thompson. 
			
			Another concern discussed was shadow flicker, which is when the 
			blade on a turbine blocks the sun as it moves, creating a flicker 
			effect.  This was raised as a concern by members of the public, with 
			some believing that it may pose a health and safety risk. 
			
			Thompson said he has spoken to people near other wind farms who 
			dealt with shadow flicker.  Thompson and Rick Sheley both said the 
			wind farm companies in other areas spent money to purchase shades or 
			provide landscaping to block the flicker effect.  Thompson asked 
			Robert Paladino, the representative for Relight, if they would be 
			willing to do the same.  Paladino said Relight would be willing to 
			do so, and they have done so in the past. 
			
			 
			
			Graff said that the possible danger to helicopters trying to land 
			for emergencies is a concern for her.  Graff said that while she 
			does not see it being a high risk, it is a problem the ZBA has to 
			keep in mind.  Thompson said a plan for such possibilities could be 
			added as a condition for the permit. 
			
			The ZBA also discussed the property values of the area involved.  
			Thompson said that studies on the subject are very wide-ranging.  
			“It goes anywhere from a positive effect to no effect to a 
			twenty-five to thirty percent reduction in property values,” said 
			Thompson.  Thompson also said he contacted the county assessor’s 
			office, and they believe that property values would not decline as a 
			result of the wind farm. 
			
			“But it does make some sense that if you have a house near a wind 
			farm, some people won’t want to live there,” said Thompson. 
			
			Graff said that the public hearings have shown an overwhelming 
			opposition to the wind farm due to a loss of not only property 
			values, but also a loss of enjoyment of the existing property.  
			“There was really no rational support for it [the wind farm].  I 
			also noted that the taxing bodies remain silent whether they wish to 
			have the turbines or not,” said Graff. 
			
			[to top of second column] | 
 
				 
				
				Thompson said this has been an unusual situation, as the only 
				support for the wind farm has come from the applicant.  Thompson 
				said none of the people who have agreed to have towers on their 
				property have come forward, and none of the school districts 
				(who would receive a majority of the property taxes) have spoken 
				on this either.  “Nobody said they wanted the county to receive 
				the building permit fees; nobody said they wanted the roads 
				improved to carry this heavy equipment,” said Thompson.  “We’re 
				surprised.” 
			
			Thompson also asked Paladino for clarification on something 
			addressed at the previous hearing.  At the November hearing, 
			questions were asked as to whether or not financial agreements could 
			be arranged for those who have not signed any of these leases, but 
			would still fall into an area of effect of a quarter-mile.  As of 
			the December hearing, Relight had agreed to pay $5 per acre per year 
			to these homeowners for the life of the project if it is approved. 
			
			Paladino said that since then, it was determined that some of the 
			affected homeowners would not be receiving much in compensation due 
			to smaller parcels.  Paladino said they were looking into a minimum 
			payment for this condition.  Relight was considering a minimum 
			number of $100 per year of operation. 
			
			Thompson said he had considered the same thing since November, but 
			he wanted to see Relight pay $500 per year as a minimum value.  
			Paladino said they would be willing to pay that amount as a 
			condition for the permit. 
			
			Thompson said he knows other wind farms have made similar agreements 
			with landowners, and these agreements have come with conditions that 
			a landowner cannot take legal action against the wind farm.  
			Paladino said Relight has no intention of preventing landowners from 
			making their issues with the company known. 
			
			“My intention was not to make a document similar to the others,” 
			said Paladino. 
			
			 
			
			Graff said she feels this use would not be compatible with 
			agricultural needs in the area, such as aerial application of 
			pesticides.  Graff said she knows some applicators will not be 
			willing to fly through the area with turbines running, or they will 
			charge higher prices per application. 
			
			Thompson asked Paladino if he knew of a solution to this problem.  
			Paladino said that in the past, Relight has worked out agreements 
			with individual farmers on a basis of necessity to shut down 
			specific turbines during application of pesticides.  Paladino said 
			it could not be set to a weekly basis or anything regular, but 
			individual turbines could be shut down as the need arises. 
			
			Thompson asked as to whether or not road agreements have been drawn 
			up with the county engineer and township road commissioners.  
			D’Andrea said the agreements have not been started yet, but would 
			need to be as one of the conditions for use. 
			
			Another condition that was added by the ZBA was a time frame for 
			construction during the day.  Paladino said that typically for a 
			project like this, construction would occur from 7:00 in the morning 
			until 7:00 at night.  The ZBA changed that to sunrise-to-sunset for 
			hours of construction.  
			
			As the deliberations ended, a motion was made by Sheley to accept 
			the conditional use requested by Relight with the attached 
			conditions.  Sheley and Farmer voted yes; Thompson and Graff voted 
			no.  As a result, the ZBA has no recommendation to give to the 
			county board, which will make the final decision.  The conditions 
			discussed by the ZBA will be forwarded to the county board as part 
			of their considerations. 
			
			Thompson encouraged guests present to contact the county board 
			members with their concerns and thoughts on the issue.  The county 
			board will begin discussing the matter on the 15th of 
			January. 
			
			 [Derek Hurley]  
			 
			
			 |