ANTRIM PLANNING BOARD MEETING
April 2, 2009 Meeting
Members & Staff Present: Scott Burnside Diane Chauncey Joe Koziell Steve Schacht Sandy Snow Paul Vasques Kathi Wasserloos CR Willeke
Member & Staff Absent: Andrew Robblee
Public Attendees: Jack Kenworthy (Eolian Renewable Energy)
Drew Kenworthy (Eolian Renewable Energy)
Travis Bullard (Eolian Renewable Energy)
Ron Haggett (Zoning Board of Adjustment)
Jesse Lazar (Resident)
Peter Moore (Antrim Energy Conservation Committee)
Gordon Webber (Selectmen)
Ben Pratt (Antrim Energy Conservation Committee)
Michael Ott (Landowner, Map 212 Lot 30)
Public Meeting: Vice-Chair Snow convened the meeting at 7:15. He had the Board introduce themselves, and then invited the Eolian Renewable Energy Group to present their proposal.
Conceptual Consultation for a Wind Farm in the western portion (Tuttle Hill) of Antrim on 3 parcels: Ott, Map 212 Lot 030; Druan, Map 211, Lot 4; Bean, Map 235 Lot 014, in the Rural Conservation District. File # 2009-02PB
Jack Kenworthy (CEO of Eolian Renewable Energy) spoke for the group, explaining their New England based company with a thirteen page Power Point Presentation and a handout (available to view at Town Hall during business hours), which matched the slide show. The following points were made:
The Company - Eolian Renewable Energy, LLC - Portsmouth, NH
A young company
New England based small utility scale wind and solar energy developer
Projects in Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Vermont, & Rhode Island
Focused on distributed renewable energy, not mega-projects
Seeking communities interested in hosting cutting edge wind and solar facilities to assist economic development and environmental stewardship
Ten years of experience in renewable energy development, real estate development, environmental consulting, construction, and cultural resource preservation
Wind Energy
The US presently produces 50% of its electricity from burning coal, causing over
2.5 billion tons of CO2 emissions annually
Wind and other carbon free technologies presently produce less than 2% of all
electricity in the country
The Department of Energy has set a target goal for 20% wind energy by 2030
Denmark, Holland Germany have set the standard for high wind penetrations
Over 50% of the installations in those countries are smaller, distributed systems
located in communities like Antrim
Wind Energy in New England
Wind energy projects are becoming more common in New England
Maine has four commercial projects in operation and dozens more being permitted
New Hampshire has only one operational wind utility scale wind farm (Lempster)
though more are in early development stages
New Hampshire Renewable Portfolio Standard goals call for 23.8% renewable
energy by 2025
Smaller, distributed projects enhance benefits for the state and local communities
Wind Energy in Antrim, NH
Fits Eolian’s GIS model for site suitability (wind, access, transmission, land use, etc)
Fits Eolian’s development model of smaller utility scale wind generation
Initial land owner contacts have shown interest in hosting turbines and other facilities on their properties
No known ‘Fatal Flaws’ at this time
Two topographical maps of western Antrim showing Tuttle Hill – proposed area
Color graph depicting value of Meter Wind Speed in proposed area
Project Details
Six to eight turbines (Vestas, GE. Gamesa or similar) approximately 1.5 – 2 MW
each (9 – 16 MW project size potential)
Median size average annual production is 32,000,000 KWH, approximately enough for 5000 homes
Will reduce carbon emissions by over 40 million pounds over its lifetime
Construction cost is approximately $25-35 million dollars
Benefits to Antrim
Increased tax revenue for town without increased costs associated with other
development activities
Creates construction jobs
Landowner royalties from wind operations
Reduced environmental footprint
Recognition for participation in clean energy future
Three simulated photos of Tuttle Hill Model Layout
Status
Presently in discussions with landowners and abutters
Seeking guidance from Antrim Planning Board on necessary permits and applicability of zoning regulations
In discussions with NH Department of Environmental Services about further
permitting requirements
Working with PSNH on interconnection issues relative to getting power to the
grid
Preparing for full feasibility analysis: wind resource, access, wildlife, costs, etc.
Next Steps
Seek variance and special exception for temporary meteorological tower to
measure wind
Seek guidance on Eolian’s ability to build a wind facility in this location if the
resource assessment proves to be positive
Commence full environmental and engineering reviews for state and local review
and approval
Total estimated time to commence construction 18-24 months
Construction time 9 – 12 months
Mr. Jack Kenworthy thanked the Board and public attendees for listening to the Wind Farm presentation.
Vice Chair asked if the Board had any questions for Eolian. The following questions were asked by Board members and answered by the Eolian group:
Mr. Schacht: Where would the met tower be sited and what would the impact be of the temporary structure?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: The meteorological tower would be sited in the middle of the ridge within the middle third. The structure is a tilt up tubular tower with no permanent base. It is held in place by guide wires, auger screws (deep spade). There would be no long term impact to the land and installation would not require heavy machinery.
Mr. Koziell: Has the Eolian Company done any installations yet?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: No, not a wind farm.
Mr. Snow: What is the size of the meteorological tower?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: The met tower is just under 200’.
Mr. Willeke: Will a substantial road be necessary and what would long term maintenance of the structures involve?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: The roads would be built on the NW portion of the properties. The structures would need twice a year routine maintenance. The machines are designed to last 25 years.
Mr. Burnside: Would the power lines be underground?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: Although the exact interconnection point is not known at this time, there should be no additional above ground lines. Each turbine would have its own transformer.
Mr. Burnside: Would there be separate buildings (for each tower)?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: Separate buildings should not be needed.
Mr. Koziell: What utilities will be needed?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: Because power is able to flow in both directions, the electrical power needed will be there.
Mr. Schacht: Will FAA lighting be necessary for the tower peaks?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: FAA lights will be necessary.
Mr. Schacht: Could a comparison be made to the former Crotched Mountain Wind Farm?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: A current wind farm is very different from 20 years ago. Technological differences and policy climate differences make the comparison not feasible.
Vice-chair Snow: What would it (the wind farm) gain the Town of Antrim?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: Some job creation during the construction phase would occur. The tax revenue base would be increased. The landowners would receive royalties.
Mr. Vasques stated that it can not be said with certainty whether or not a wind farm is a public utility. When looking at RSA 362:2, the definition of public utility is quite broad, and Town Counsel has said the issue needs to be researched further.
Mrs. Wasserloos: How many local jobs would be created by the Wind Farm?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: Not many, and no long term jobs – but there would be tax revenue.
Mr. Burnside: Would the road maintenance be similar to the needs of a cell tower road?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: Yes, very similar. The roads would be used on a regular maintenance basis and would always be the possibilities of emergencies.
Mr. Snow: How many trees would need to be cut?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: It is hard to predict the number of trees, but approximately 15 acres will be disturbed.
Mr. Bullard: This area has been significantly impacted already by a timber cut in 2003.
Mr. Snow: How will wildlife be impacted?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: Wildlife data has been studied. The average mortality for birds and bats is one to two per year per turbine. The migratory pattern of fowl and song birds is random and dispersed.
Mr. Koziell: Will a security fence be required?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: No. The poles are not easy to climb and the doors at the base of the towers are locked.
Mr. Bullard: Some turbines have a fence and gate.
Mr. Schacht: Would current snowmobile, hiking, and cross-country trails be affected? Will the availability of the trails remain accessible?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: A change would be made from the existing accessibility – only if the landowner restricts access. Wind farms create a large positive impact and a small negative impact.
Mr. Willeke: Will surrounding communities see a reduction in PSNH rates?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: Generally, no. Large wind power projects sell to large companies and do not impact local towns.
Vice-chair Snow: You have said that a turbine lasts 25 years – what happens when they are no longer operating?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: The turbines are designed to operate for 25 years. At the end of their lives, they would be decommissioned if they can no longer operate or they are re-powered. It is usually in the best interest of the company to keep them operating.
Mr. Koziell: How deep are the towers anchored?
Mr. Bullard: The poles are 12’ at the base. The anchors would be 15’ – 16’ deep.
Vice Chair Snow asked for any further questions from the Planning Board. He then opened questioning to the Public. Although, the meeting was not intended to be a Public Hearing Vice-Chair Snow would allow limited comments from attendees. Attendees asked questions, and Eolian Company LLC members answered:
Mr. Webber: How high is the blade and would snowmobiles be able to go under the blades?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: The blade at its lowest rotation would not interfere with snowmobiles.
Mr. Moore: How much land will be leased? Will access of the land be controlled by Eolian or the land owner, and what about fire protection? And how was Eolian able to determine the available wind speeds?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: The technicalities of land leasing have yet to been worked out. The construction and operation of the structures would involve easements and road access. The 15 acre figure is approximated. The land owner would determine access. The structures will be alarmed for fire protection.
Mr. D. Kenworthy: The wind speed information is accessible and predictable from computer models. The mean power for the turbines is 16 mph.
Mrs. Wasserloos: Can you tell us about shadow flicker and the ‘fall-down’ zone?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: The blades of the turbine can cause a strobe affect that can occur when sun shines through the blades on a NE to SW direction. It would definitely be an affect that would be considered. The ‘fall-down’ zone is 1 ½ times the height of the tower and is a standard setback.
Mr. Koziell: Have environmental studies and noise studies been done?
Mr. J. Kenworthy: The sound of the turbines has been compared to a refrigerator running. With newer technologies, the sound attenuation is considered very quiet.
As there were no further questions, Mr. Vasques explained that according to Town Counsel, the definition of a large wind farm as a public utility is not clear. He then asked Eolian to explain the time line of going further with the project.
Mr. J. Kenworthy stated that landowner leases would needed
to be obtained. A variance for height would be necessary from the Zoning Board of Adjustment, and then a major Site Plan Review with the Planning Board. Eolian would prefer to apply for the meteorological tower and the variance at the same time.
At first, Mr. Vasques stated that guidance from Town Counsel would be needed concerning the necessary procedure, but he felt that the requests would be heard at separate meetings. Mr. Burnside felt that Eolian should be able to apply for both requests at the same time, because it would be foolish to set up the meteorological tower if the height variance was not granted. Mr. Schacht agreed, and the consensus was that both requests should be applied for simultaneously.
Mr. Koziell was interested in the confidence level of the landowners. Mr. Ott (landowner of Map 212 Lot 30) said that he was concerned for damage on the ridge, the main collector for the energy produced, and the people that would be drawn to the area to view the wind farm, especially people who may not be caring of the land.
Mr. J. Kenworthy said that the concerns were legitimate and would be carefully considered.
On a lighter note, one of the Board members suggested that Michael Ott could set up a toll booth and become a toll taker.
The Conceptual Consultation was ended and a 5-minute recess was set by Vice-Chair Snow.
Approval of Planning Board Meeting Minutes: Mrs. Wasserloos moved the March 19, 2009 minutes as presented. Mr. Willeke seconded the motion and the minutes were unanimously approved by the Board.
Business Meeting:
Election of Chairperson & Vice-Chairperson
Mr. Koziell nominated Mr. Burnside as Chairperson. The nomination was seconded by Mr. Schacht. Mr. Burnside accepted the nomination. A vote was taken and unanimously approved.
Mr. Schacht nominated Mr. Willeke for Vice-Chairperson. The nomination was seconded by Mr. Snow. Mr. Willeke accepted the nomination. A vote was taken and unanimously approved.
Master Plan Status – Vasques
Everything has been provided to Ms. Taylor. The Master Plan is close to the final draft. The draft has been posted on the website. Mr. Vasques felt that the Master Plan did not need to be further reviewed by the Planning Board but questioned if it should be reviewed by Town Counsel. Mr. Schacht said that the Selectmen should review the draft and Town Counsel would review it only if necessary. The Master Plan Draft's next step would be a Public Hearing.
Mr. Burnside reiterated that the draft Master Plan should be read by local businesses such as Edmunds, Bakery 42, the Chamber of Commerce, etc. The Board agreed with his suggestion. Mr. Vasques will compile a list of business.
Subdivision Regulation Changes – Option B
Mr. Vasques continues to develop the language for Option B.
Revised Roster
Mr. Vasques introduced Jesse Lazar as an interested resident who would like to be considered as an alternate for the Planning Board. Mr. Burnside nominated Mr. Lazar as an alternate. It was seconded by Mr. Snow, and unanimously approved.
Correspondences:
Francestown: AT&T cell tower. Site walk April 18, 2009
Irrevocable letter of credit for Mighty Oaks Realty, Inc - The Letter of Credit is amended to extend the expiration date to September 27, 2010. All other terms and conditions remain the same.
Code Enforcement: No new actions
New Business from the Floor:
New Cingular (AT&T) status: Mr. Vasques explained that the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) meeting with AT&T of March 17, 2009 had been continued to April 14, 2009. The ZBA will meet for a work session to discuss a Radio Frequency engineer, a balloon/crane test, and a site walk on April 7, 2009,
At 8:45 pm, Mr. Willeke moved to adjourn the meeting which was seconded by Mr. Koziell, and unanimously agreed upon by all. Chair Snow adjourned the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Diane Chauncey, Planning Assistant
| 
