Dartmouth Residents Go To Board of Health over Wind Turbines
Posted in the North Dartmouth Forum
#1 Oct 18, 2011
Group wants tougher standards for regulating turbinesText Size: A | A | A
Print this Article Email this Article ShareThis
By Curt Brown
October 18, 2011 12:00
— Opponents of the town's plan to construct two 262-foot wind turbines will appear before the Board of Health, asking it to adopt strict noise standards regulating all wind-generating facilities.
Christopher Senie, a Westboro attorney, said he and two sound engineers will ask the Board of Health at its meeting Wednesday at 7:45 a.m. to adopt a stricter measuring stick for evaluating noise pollution from wind turbines.
If the regulations are adopted, he said, the town would have to reduce the size of the turbines to 164 feet if it wants to build them on the same town-owned site off Chase Road.
He said the town would also have the choice to retain the 262-foot turbines and move them to another location farther from neighbors if the standard was adopted.
Senie said his clients want the health board to adopt an acceptable background noise level that is 10 decibels lower than the state Department of Environmental Protection's current standard.
They will also ask health officials to require additional tests to measure noise pollution, including a test for determining lower frequency sounds.
He said the regulations are important in the protection of neighbors affected by a wind facility. There are 150 homes within 3,000 feet of the two turbines, he said.
Senie said he, on behalf of his clients, will ask the health board Wednesday to consider adopting tougher standards and hold a public hearing on it.
If those standards are adopted, he said, it would also provide the Board of Health with a way to mitigate noise complaints after construction.
Currently, the only way neighbors can address noise problems is in the courts under the common law theory of a nuisance, which is difficult to win, Senie said.
Health board member Thomas W. Hardman, stressing he was speaking for himself, said he wants to gather as much information as possible on the issue beginning at Wednesday's meeting.
Jeanne Nesto, a Chase Road resident and one of the opponents of the project, said she has spoken to and received emails from people who live near turbines and complain about headaches, nausea, increased irritability and a lack of concentration.
"That's our complaint. There are serious problems with them," she said.
Executive Administrator David G. Cressman said he plans to attend the meeting to hear the presentation.
He said the town is considering forming a partnership with a private developer on the project. He said officials have requested proposals and received three of them.
#2 Oct 18, 2011
Wind Turbine Syndrome in Falmouth (Massachusetts)
"If you want to see the future, come to Falmouth," Massachusetts Gov Patrick said. The Falmouth commercial wind turbine is making the residents who live around it sick!
Gov Patricks renewable energy plan could go on hold over wind turbine sickness.
The Wind Energy Siting Reform Act,WESRA, is NOT a reform act but a means to take away your town bylaws and zoning restrictions. Residents in several towns around the New Bedford area filed legal action against commercial wind turbines being sited as close as 700 feet from residential homes. The residents using their own resources formed citizens groups to stop these 400 foot turbines in their residential locations . In the end the residents won based on current bylaws and zoning restrictions.
Gov Patrick has an agenda to install commercial wind turbines to reach his 2020 goal of renewable energy. Because the residents of the SouthCoast used current laws to protect their property rights the governor has proposed this " Reform Act" to take away the residential property rights,bylaws and zoning restrictions .
Falmouth ,Massachusetts is an example of what's wrong with commercial wind turbine siting in Massachusetts !
Senate President Therese Murray (D-Plymouth) is worried about your health and how close wind turbines are to your home. But lets look at the residents living near or in her district in Falmouth ,Massachusetts.
Two turbines were installed in Falmouth using stimulus funds.The two turbines were purchased by the semi quasi state agency Massachusetts Technology Collaborative for 5.2 million around 2004 and held in a warehouse in Texas at $3300.00 a month until the warranty ran out.The MTC paid for all the studies for the Town of Falmouth and then unloaded the turbines onto the town in peoples back yards .
"Your health and well-being is of the utmost concern to me and nobody should" experience discomfort, Murray said.
But Senate President Therese Murray backs the WESRA ,Wind Energy Siting Reform Act which is not a reform act but another Beacon Hill trick to take your towns zoning bylaws,zoning and open space for commercial wind turbine contractors .They call this act a reform act to fool the voters into thinking it's some kind of reform.The act actually makes things worse.
The AG should be looking into the Falmouth wind turbine .How were they bought by a semi quasi state agency in 2004 kept in warehouse at 3300 per month until 2009 then sold again using stimulus funds to the Town of Falmouth for a second sale and how the owners of the turbines where the MTC or the semi quasi state agency providing the positive information to sell the turbines that were stuck with .
These two turbines are also 55 ton gear driven turbines which are not being made anymore .The gear noise is another issue !
#3 Oct 18, 2011
The wind turbine industry, along with Gov. Deval Patrick, is pushing the state senate to adopt the Wind Energy Siting Reform Act . The Act is now known as H.1775 and the Senate version is S.1666.
The purpose of the Act is to achieve the governor's goal of shoehorning massive industrial wind turbines into our once quiet and rural neighborhoods through a careless set of special wind industry benefits that include overriding local control, replacing environmental laws with "standards," and eliminating traditional rights of participation and appeal by the public.
This legislation is a radical and unprecedented assault on the fundamental rights of communities to control industrial development within their borders, on the environmental laws that our legislative body has enacted to govern the impacts of such developments upon our state's natural resources, and on the long-established rights of municipalities and our constituents to appeal decisions adverse to their interests through the court system.
The bill concentrates all power over wind development projects in a single agency, the Energy Facilities Siting Board, part of the Executive Office of Energy & Environment.
This Act explicitly authorizes this single state agency to approve wind projects regardless of local decisions and regardless of recommendations from other state agencies with expertise related to such projects. It also replaces environmental laws with weaker "standards" that can be waived solely at the discretion of that agency and eliminates rights of appeal by municipal officers, municipalities, and most by other parties.
This Act does not solve the problems which it is intended to address, but instead creates a slew of new problems. It also underestimates, if not disrespects, the proven skill, judgment and fairness of the Local Zoning Board of Appeals.
Regional planning agencies have already expressed their concerns with the Act, along with a number of select boards and environmental groups.
Eliminating local review authority and the safeguards of existing state laws and judicial review is not appropriate and as such is an extreme piece of legislation which would deliver a package of special privileges any wind turbine contractor and the rest of the wind industry.
This legislation is also another worrisome sign of the wind industry trying to' leap frog' any towns open space into an over-subsidized, ineffective and inefficient industrial wind turbine zone. It should not be signed into law.
Gov Patrick said :"Now it's a matter of public record." The governor was eliciting laughter in the courtroom trial of Sal Dimasi. He also said :"Are there no secrets?"
He admitted his email pseudonym is Sally Reynolds .
This was not the case a few months ago when the state refused to release the email code name used with ocean wind contractors and the power companies in an effort to double and triple our electric bills over a ten year period with expensive ocean wind turbine renewable energy.The state will not be required to reveal a pseudonym Governor Patrick uses in e-mail that was redacted from documents.
What was in those emails ? They should be public record ! Why does the Governor of Massachusetts use code names to conduct state business?
Add your comments below
|New Lead In New Bedford Murder Case (Nov '10)||Jan 1||Champ||5|
|EDITORIAL: Revised bail policies help, but don'...||Dec 29||Pete||3|
|Gay Agenda Wreaks Havoc on America (Jan '12)||Dec 23||Devon||2|
|Catholic Local teacher accused of child abuse (Feb '09)||Oct '17||SILENCE||18|
|Boycott Stop and Shop (May '08)||Sep '17||Never SNS||56|
|Help wanted: Amazon holds job fair to hire 50,0...||Sep '17||Simplejim||3|
|Fall River Jukebox (Jun '12)||Sep '17||Musikologist||17|
Find what you want!
Search North Dartmouth Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC