Wind turbine restrictions remain
Town Board farm bloc falls one vote shy of gaining approval to relax construction restrictions
18 comments below
Mattituck vintners David Page and Barbara Shinn hope to install this model of electricity-producing wind turbine produced by an Oklahoma manufacturer on their Oregon Road farm. The town's Zoning Board of Appeals has yet to rule on their variance application.
The Town Board's three farmers could not sway any of the other three members this week to pursue a code change to remove the requirement that a wind turbine be sited at least 300 feet from the property line. A number of Southold growers say that's excessive and only a handful of properties meet that criterion.
The board's non-farming members sided with Supervisor Scott Russell, who has said it's premature to change a wind turbine law that has yet to be tested.
Growers who don't meet the setback limits can seek a variance through the town's Zoning Board of Appeals. That board is considering a bid by Shinn Estate Vineyards owners David Page and Barbara Shinn to install a 120-foot tower on their 22-acre farm on Oregon Road in Mattituck. The 10-kilowatt generator would stand 140 feet from the Sidor potato farm.
Mr. Page said he believes it will be difficult for the ZBA to grant the variance, given that town law requires more than double his open area.
"I am extremely disappointed that the town has not decided to take advantage of this technology and promote it for our agricultural community and everyone else," he said. Only about 150 properties in Southold, about 2 percent of all parcels, can meet the 300-foot requirement, Mr. Page added.
In response, the Republican supervisor has said that the town needs to consider the potential impacts on those living adjacent to farms. "You can't ignore the neighbors," he said.
The Town Board has had several wind turbine discussions in recent weeks. The issue came up again during last Thursday's Code Committee session.
That panel and the town's Alternative Energy Committee both suggested changing the law, perhaps to a distance of the height of the tower plus 10 feet -- with a minimum setback of 100 feet.
The issue surfaced again during Tuesday's Town Board work session. Crossing political lines, Republican Councilman Bill Ruland joined fellow farmers, Democrats Tom Wickham and Al Krupski, in voicing support for revisiting the setback issue.
Republican board members Vincent Orlando and Fishers Island Justice Louisa Evans agreed with Mr. Russell in letting the ordinance stand as is.
Mr. Wickham, who is leaving office at the end of the year, said the 300-foot requirement "is more than we can justify." He also called for the town to expand the law to permit turbines on residential properties.
Mr. Ruland broke with his farming brethren and sided with Mr. Russell, his GOP running mate two years ago, in opposing allowing windmills on residential lands. The current farm-only code requires a minimum of five acres. The town's Land Preservation Committee recently decided that wind turbines can go up on farmlands that have been protected through the sale of development rights.
"It's an expensive endeavor with a dubious payback," said Mr. Ruland of the residential option.
Mr. Russell added, "If you're going to require a farmer to have seven acres but a homeowner a half-acre, that doesn't make sense."
In the past Mr. Page has suggested that the current code may have been crafted to either slow or prevent the installation of wind turbines.
The supervisor argues that there's another explanation for the suggested language change.
"We pass a law and when the first application comes in we look to change the law to accommodate it," Mr. Russell said. "This is a bad way to run town government, The law doesn't prevent Mr. Page from having a wind turbine. He simply wants to put it in a specific location."
Mr. Page said moving the proposed tower to accommodate the town would require removing some of his grapevines or digging a 1,300-foot trench to bury the transmission lines, as is required.
Tkelly@timesreview.com
The Suffolk Times is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. The Suffolk Times does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not The Suffolk Times. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Service and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
18 comments found
wind turbines wrong : 9/17/2009
Certain types of products used in going green are fine, however windmills and turbines are very destructive to the ecological balance of nature. Use of these types of apparatus cause harmful sonic resonances not always dectected by human ear. This injure every living creature on the planet. Not only does the mechanical part do damage but, the very high ultra sound frequencies that these things produce inhibit and disrupt the natural order of reproduction in birds, insects, fish, mammals and reptiles. Stop them now or everything else will suffer.
Supervisor Russell? : 9/16/2009
The comments that have been signed by Scott Russell can't really be coming from our Town Supervisor, can they? Is it possible that someone is signing his name to comments just to make him look silly and out of touch?
wind turbine : 9/16/2009
Actually, the 9000 is a worst case for the application. The other 2 options would be to have the ZBA approve it or to locate it slightly west of the prefered site. The trenching and wire is about 10 a foot, or less then 2000 dollars. Those options and costs need to be weighed by the owner. The Town can't change law because someone didn't have a good vision for the development of their own property. A good business owner/farmer usually develops and evaluates a good business plan with a clear idea of how his own site should be developed.Experienced Farmers are particularly good at maximizing their land use because of the needs of the operation. Sorry that wasn't the case here. By the way, if additional trenching were needed, that would reflect less then 10% of the overall cost. Now, I have been an appraiser for almost 20 years. I have no idea what the impact would be on neighboring property values if a 120 foot tall wind generator were located next to a residential property. It may be none or it may be substantial. With no data to cull from, it is an unanswerable question.Until we have a few located in Town and are able to answer those questions, I would rather be cautionary. Of course, someone might not really care about the neighbors and would just as easily think they should be able to save a couple of bucks even if the turbine affected values of neighboring houses. The problem is that those neighbors are probably a farmer or small business owner, too. You may not like it, but the Town has to think about them and not just you. Regards, Scott Russell
Shinn wind : 9/16/2009
I guess it should come as no surprise to see a local town beauracrat with a huge budget deficit of his own call a 9000 dollar capital expenditure by a farmer and small business "not prohibitive".
wind turbine : 9/16/2009
I actually have spent a considerable amount of researching all alternative energies. The issue here is not really about functionality since the wind loads at the allowable site a better then the location near structures. Second, the cost of adding 160 to the trenching and wire needs are not prohibitive(9000 dollars). Further, the rate if electric dissipation over 160 feet is nominal given the quality of the conduits available(2%). I also confimed these facts with professionals that install these for a living. I think the issue here may have been that the applicant thought the land preservation committee would simply not allow it on the parcel where the code requires placement because the development rights had been sold. The applicant never stated so, but, I suspect that was his concern. However, I understand that the applicant met with that group and the meeting went well. There are larger issues here that you must keep in mind. I do not have the luxury of changing law based on the specifics of one application. Like I said, I support the Shinn Page effort here. However, I need to factor in community issues, as well. Please feel free to contact me to discuss this anytime. I am available if you call the office or come to a Town Board meeting. I assure you, I am for real and quite supportinve of alternative energy sources. Scott Russell
False Facts : 9/15/2009
Who is being intellectually dishonest? Why would an intelligent person like our Supervisor write: "law requires he locate it 190 feet farther away from the spot he wants to but, where it would work perfectly fine" ... Scott Russell I am sure Supervisor Russell knows that the desired location is not based on personal preference but rather on cost and operational effectiveness. Noone is asking to change the law for just to have everything their way. It appears Supervisor Russell is refusing to change the law because he does not want to accept the true facts of how local generation of energy works. Supervisor Russell are you for real?
wind turbine : 9/15/2009
Your points do not reflect the reality of the situation. First, what does party have to do with anything. That was raised in the article and by some posters but, you should be aware of the fact that the party split on this. Bill Ruland voted to ease the setback and I did not. Also, we, as a board, generally support alternative energies. I probably more that all of the others except Al Krupski. He shares my passion for it. We do not simply need to change the setback here as I said over and over again. The application can go foward under the current law without changes. That is if the applicant really wants to. Maybe they do not, I do not know why there aren't. Someone also gre tired of my facts. Sorry but they matter. We currently have 3 turbines in Southold Town with a 4th pending in Cutchogue. With recently agreed to changes to the law, we will see many more. Thanks, Scott Russell
wind power : 9/15/2009
When are we going to stop fighting over alternative energy. Do these board members see any advantage in not allowing a farmer to be a little more green and possible keep it economical to stay on Long island? With all the industries leaving the area you would think that Towns would be working together to keep this industry here on Long Island. What is the economic value of Vineyards to Southhampton? Doing what's right for your party over doing what's right for the industries future. Why is this even an issue?
Wink Turbines : 9/14/2009
This would seem like an excellent oportunity for Long Island to take a leadership position in this important environmentally oriented technology. Finding uses for these novel developments are the hard part, and these seem like a "slam dunk" to me. A real slam dunk that is. Thank you
issue with wind turbine permits : 9/13/2009
Dear Mr. Russell, We all realize now you wrote this very progressive bill allowing for wind turbines to be installed in your legislative district. So how many have actually been installed? I think the correct answer is zero. What good is an ordinance if it's impractical or too costly to follow? Law makers need to find ways to encourage alternative enregy sources, not stifle them. Please reconsider changing your current law and stop quoting us your "facts".
wind turbine : 9/13/2009
Please get to know the facts. Mr Russell(me) actually wrote the law that allows him to have a wind turbine right here, right now. We do NOT need to change the code to have them move foward. They merely need a real committment to it to move foward. Further, no one "denied" them a permit. The issue is location, that is all. By the way, I would argue that it is our "good fork" that has actually gotten the attention for Shinn Page, not the other way around. Regards, Scott
Windmills : 9/13/2009
I just don't understand the problem, Barbara Shinn and David Page have successfully developed an organic Vineyard and are producing award winning wines from that Vineyard. They are attracting alot of attention and a lot of those people after visiting Shinn Vineyards have come to love our "Good Fork" on Lond Island. Denying David and Barbare a permit to install a windmill seems counterintuitive. We are trying to teach ourselves and our children on how to conserve energy and to use our intellectual power to better our lives and the lives of our children. Doesn't windpower make more sense than coal fired generators? I am a big fan of Thomas Jefferson, I'm sure if he were still with us he'd have a few things to say to Mr. Russell and his colleagues who have denied the Shinns their dream.
Farms and windmills : 9/12/2009
There was a time when just about every farm in the country had a windmill, an absolute necessity for pumping water and milling grain. Today's clean, green wind turbines can enable farms, like Shinn Estate Vineyards, to significantly reduce their dependence on fossil fuels, something that's absolutely crucial to the future of our nation and our planet. Less demand on the electric grid, and the resulting decrease in pollution, benefits all of us. So long as the turbine is set back from the properly line sufficiently -- the tower's height plus 10 feet seems like a good compromise -- there really shouldn't be any problem. And this isn't a Democratic or Republican issue -- it's about much more than that. Change the law, and let Shinn Estate Vineyards -- one of the wineries so important to the North Fork's economy -- go green(er).
wind turbines : 9/11/2009
First, you understand some facts. I actually was one of the people who helped draft the legislation to allow wind turbines on farms. Prior to that law they were not allowed- anywhere. I actually also support the expansion of the law to allow any property to apply for regardless of its zone or use. I also support reducting the land size requirement from 7 to 5 acres. All this and, yes, I am a Republican. The Shinn application and the issues there have been badly misrepresented by someone and I do not know why. The Shinn owners are permitted to put one up tomorrow if they choose to, without the need for a varience. The difference of where they can put it and where they want to put it is about 190 feet. No, they do not need to trench 1300 feet as stated and no, they do not need to rip out an acre of vines. how these statements and why these got put foward as "facts" by the applicant is unknown to me. Further, the assertion that only 150 parcels would qualify under the current law is a complete fabrication- made up to advance a personel goal. After all, under the current law, the applicant himself qualifies without a varience. We are reducing both acre and use of land requirements for this law and increasing the size of the turbine allowed on site. The setback is only the height of the tower plus 10 feet and only requires 300 feet if the property borders properties improved with residences. I would submit that if the posters here really supported wind tech. as an alternative energy source, then you would understand the need to be sure that we do not force it down the throats of neighbors. Especially when an operation has the land to locate it without doing that. By the way, Mr. Page states that he fears our law is intended to slow or stop the location of wind turbines in Southold. Then why would we have created and passed the law in the first place? It should also be noted that I wrote a letter of support for Mr. Page for his application for grants and generally supported his project from day one. The notion that we are being resistant because the law requires he locate it 190 feet farther away from the spot he wants to but, where it would work perfectly fine is being intellectually dishonest. Frankly, many, many applications for all sorts of structures get applied for every day and many of those structures do not always get placed exactly where the owner wants based on over-riding zoning issues. Some people need to accept that fact as part of living in a community. Regards, Scott Russell
Do the right thing - let them go green! : 9/11/2009
Hello - my wife and I left Long Island last year and moved to the Portland, OR area, where the local wine business and small farmers are thriving, due primarily to the support of both local government and consumers who appreciate their efforts. Many of these small businesses have adopted a number of practices to enable themselves to grow better products while, at the same time, preserving the environment both for themselves and for the people in their area. It is unfortunate that the majority of the Southold town board is unwilling to let the folks at Shinn "do the right thing" and establish an alternative power source for their needs. The Board should look at how a more open-minded approach to solving our energy needs serves to benefit us here in OR and in the hundreds of other places in the U.S. who have adopted a more supportive approach to our long-term energy needs. I'm sure that the Board has their reasons for not supporting these potential energy-saving efforts - one has to wonder what they REALLY are... Best of luck to the Shinn Estate folks in their fight to do what's right.
Wind turbines and Long Island Farming : 9/11/2009
I am amazed that in this time of economic difficulty and increasingly expensive power options, we are not all completely on board with all efforts to produce sustainable energy sources and to SUPPORT OUR LOCAL FARMERS. What is there to consider? What is the drawback? The only thing stopping sustainable farming via wind power is, as usual, political greed. Do we really want the east end of Long Island to become another Queens? Do we really prefer another strip mall to a naturally powered windmill? Have we sunk that low? Get behind our local farmers, folks. - Heide Hoegl
wind turbine restrictions : 9/11/2009
Sad to see Republican opposition to any form of progress playing out at such a local level over a variance for a wind turbine that will provide affordable green energy. I hope Shinn Estate gets its wind turbine.
what a whirlwind. : 9/11/2009
The Shin Estate owners have nothing but the well-being of the North Fork's agriculture on their minds (and the money they'll save). Any resistance to this progression of new energy sources is antediluvian naiveté over pure aesthetics. This notion that the shadow cast from your property needs to be regulated is ludicrous, for if conceded we would all be collecting royalties from every airline that flies over our houses.
