Barrington resident challenges zoning of wind turbine

Barrington resident challenges zoning of wind turbine

An abutter to Barrington High School believes the town may be violating a number of zoning ordinances with its siting of the proposed wind turbine. Kathleen Shafer, who lives at 210 Lincoln Ave., recently requested a zoning certificate regarding the wind turbine, which is slated to be built on the school's campus. The certificate would act to clarify the project with respect to any zoning implications of the proposed use.

Barrington Building Official Robert Speaker replied to the request by stating that the high school property — and all other town-owned property — was exempt from town zoning ordinances. He said the town has never had to apply for permits for construction projects or renovations to town-owned buildings on town property. "It's exempt," he said.

Still, Ms. Shafer said she will appeal the building official's decision at a July 17 zoning board meeting.

Ms. Shafer, whose home is located just west of the high school, is one of an apparent growing number of residents concerned about the wind turbine project (see box for project details). Some people opposing the location of the wind turbine have started a group called Citizens' Wind Watch of Barrington, which has its own website, citizenswindwatch.blogspot.com.

Others have filed letters to the editor or spoke at public meetings.

"It's not just neighbors close to the school," wrote Ms. Shafer in a recent e-mail. "It includes parents of students who are concerned about the impacts to the school and learning environment, the athletic fields, etc. from all over town."

In a recent letter to the editor, Ron Russo, who lives on Candleberry Road, wrote that visual flicker and strobe effects could be caused by the wind turbine. He cited studies that showed negative physiological effects — sleep disorders, headaches and dizziness — for people living near wind turbines. "Do we want to subject students, teachers and residents to these negative health effects?" wrote Mr. Russo.

Jill Cuzzone, who lives on Lincoln Avenue, wrote a letter questioning different aspects of the project, including an apparent fast-tracking of the approval process. "Other municipalities interested in harnessing wind power have conducted local wind studies and analyses for many years — Ipswich, Mass., four years. The Barrington energy committee first met six months ago, and while I commend them for their efforts, it seems they have not truly had enough time to consider all the information nor addressed all the issues."

Newell Thomas, who lives on Nayatt Road and has been working in the wind and solar energy business for three decades, said the town has taken the first step toward constructing a wind turbine, but "the work that has been completed is just the beginning of the effort required to make this project a reality. Now the serious work must begin."

Officials respond

Town officials say the wind turbine project has been an example of the government not working slowly, something it has been criticized for in the past.

Peter DeAngelis, the town manager, said a number of factors have weighed into the decision of where to place the wind turbine. For starters, the high school is the largest consumer of electricity for any public building in town. Officials say there may be better sites for harnessing wind power in town, but there are currently restrictions from putting the tower in one location and transferring the electricity to the high school.

Officials have also stated a desire to be a leader in utilizing renewable energy sources, which has been an initiative for the governor.

Jim Bride, the former chairman for the renewable energy committee in town, said he understands the concerns of residents, but also recognized the importance of this project.

"The whole issue of sustainability is so important," he said in an interview earlier this month. "Our energy costs are going up. If there's anything we can do to mitigate this ... this was an opportunity for Barrington to take the lead on this issue."

Zoning issue

In a document drafted by her attorneys at the firm Blish and Cavanagh, Ms. Shafer states the construction of a wind turbine in excess of 300-feet on the site is unlawful and not permitted for a number of reasons:

First, because the high school property is zoned open space-active recreation and wind turbines are not permitted in that zoning; second, because the wind turbine would far exceed height limitations for both principal structures (35 feet) and accessory structures (18 feet) stated in the dimensional regulations table of the Barrington Zoning Ordinance; third, because no provision of the town's zoning ordinance exempts the town from compliance; and fourth, because the town has no authority to amend the zoning ordinance in order to exempt itself from the necessary requirements.

The building official disagrees. He pointed to the town's zoning ordinances, chapter 185, section 4 — "Compliance required." The section includes the provision: "The Town of Barrington itself, both as to land owned by the Town and to governmental activity and use, shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter."

Mr. Speaker said he will wait to see what zoning board decides after hearing the appeal, adding that the appeal to the zoning board may be acting as a necessary step in order to take the case to the courts.

Mr. Speaker also said that Ms. Shafer's request of a zoning certificate on property other than her own was a bit unorthodox. "We give certificates on property that people own and want a ruling on, confirming or denying the legal status ... we don't speculate," he said.

Project details

At the Barrington Financial Town Meeting in May, voters approved a $2.4 million bond to fund the production of a 246-foot wind turbine. The proposed location — between the varsity football and baseball fields at the high school — has become a point of contention. Here are some details regarding the project:

Height: The proposed tower's height is 246 feet, with blade lengths of 80 feet, offering a total height of 326 feet.

Fall zone: The current location selected by officials places the tower less than 200 feet from the school building, which is well within the listed fall zone.

No interest loan: The town received approval for a $2.1 million no interest loan through the IRS, which may be site specific, meaning that if any location other than the high school is used the loan may be unavailable.

Behind the meter: The high school is reportedly the largest consumer of electricity for all public buildings. This proposed turbine would supply power directly to the school.

— By Josh Bickford

Did town rush into turbine project?

The vote over the proposed wind turbine in town has been cast, but that hasn’t stopped one man from raising concerns over the project. While the majority of people attending last week’s Financial Town Meeting voted in favor of a 264-foot wind turbine at Barrington High School, Ron Russo believes the project has too many problems for it to continue as proposed.

He pointed to the overall height of the tower, its proximity to the high school’s athletic fields and main building, some unclear information that could have confused voters, and said the project appeared to be fast-tracked by local town officials and the committee assigned to study the work.

Mr. Russo, a Candleberry Drive resident, attended the Financial Town Meeting on May 28 and even proposed an amendment to the wind turbine bond. He asked people to approve the construction of a wind turbine with the stipulation that it not be built at the high school. Voters defeated that request.

“I was late to this issue. I wasn’t paying that much attention. I wasn’t even planning on attending the town meeting. When I found out how high the tower was going to be at its location, I was surprised,” Mr. Russo said. “Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against building a wind turbine, but I feel like the high school is the wrong location for it.

“I feel like this was a rush to judgment. I think it’s the wrong size and the wrong location.”

Mr. Russo believes the deadline placed on this project pushed officials to fast-track the approval process. Barrington Town Manager Peter DeAngelis held a different perspective.

“People are used to government working slowly,” Mr. DeAngelis said. “Maybe this is an example where government is not working slowly. Last year council gave me three weeks to put together application.”

The application for a $2.1 million no interest loan through the Internal Revenue Service was filed, granted and officials later created a renewable energy committee. Jim Bride was named the chairman.

“When the committee formed at end of 2007 we were given this great opportunity. The town gave us a timeline to work with. They wanted us to make sure the citizens of Barrington, the school committee, and the town council were all on board,” Mr. Bride said.

Mr. Bride said on Monday that he is moving out of town in the near future.

“I can’t say enough about the people on this committee,” Mr. DeAngelis said. “These are good, knowledgeable people. The reason we were able to accelerate this project is because of the people who were on this committee and the work they did.”

Mr. Russo said a project of this magnitude, affecting the landscape dramatically, should not have moved as quickly.

“My feeling is that I think there was a rush to judgment to get this money,” Mr. Russo said. “I think they looked at the fact that they could get a no interest loan. They saw the money, put the application together, and they didn’t think through the impact. What about those people who own homes near the school. Their properties aren’t going to be worth dirt.”

Images questioned

Mr. Russo said the height of the tower was not correctly shown to residents and he added that the images used during the Financial Town Meeting presentation may have misled voters.

He said there was never a clear profile sketch provided to people, one that compared the heights of the wind turbine tower against existing structures like the high school building and the lights at the football field.

“The picture they showed of the tower was coming over the White Church Bridge. It was 5,000 feet away. There was no comparison drawing of what you’d see coming down County Road,” Mr. Russo said. “I think the (Barrington) Times was remiss by not showing how tall this was going to be.

“We’re going to be the laughing stock of the state. People are already laughing at Barrington for other reasons.”

Mr. DeAngelis said there were plenty of opportunities for people to get involved in the discussion process. He said there were open meetings, at which people did voice concerns and some changes were made.

“We had two public outreach sessions. At the first one we invited people who lived within 800 feet of the site. The second one was open to the public,” Mr. DeAngelis said. “We listened to what they wanted. They changed the location. Now the NIMBY [not in my back yard] crowd is bringing it about the school.”

Mr. Bride acknowledged that there were problems with the images presented at the meeting.

“I’ve heard feedback is that the image was hard to make out. I’m not denying that. We tried to do the best we could do,” he said.

Other issues

The information included in the Barrington Exploratory Wind Power Committee’s siting subcommittee report has also been brought into question.

A graphic included in the report shows the apparent minimum setback around the tower at 492 feet (drawn as a circle over the existing structures). The committee used an estimate of 500 feet for the graphic, but the scale appears off. In fact, the circle designating the setback appears closer to 300 feet rather than 500.

When asked about the graphic, Mr. Bride said he would take another look to see if the scale was inaccurate.

The fall zone for the tower is set at 328 feet, and while there are no private residences within 500 feet of the tower, the high school is less than 200 feet from the proposed tower’s base — well within the fall zone.

“These are not designed to fall down,” Mr. Bride said. “I know people have concerns, but there is a lot of engineering that goes into these projects.”

Patrick Guida, the chairman for the Barrington School Committee, said the board has studied the project and discussed it numerous times.

“Right now, based on what has been explained to us, we don’t believe safety is an issue,” he said. “From our perspective, there are different time frames when an accident would be more or less likely to occur.”

He said construction of the turbine could prove to be a dangerous period, especially when crews are moving the turbine blades into place.

“We have to be sure that the site would be cordoned off,” Mr. Guida said. “Could that be readily addressed and enough precautions taken during that period of time? Once it becomes operation, what are the concerns? If there were too great a wind, and if there was any malfunction, or if there were a problem because of an ice factor, that might also create an issue.”

Mr. Guida said much of his concerns and those of other school committee members were quelled by officials involved with the project. He said the committee will continue to monitor the proposed project closely.

“We approved this conditionally,” he said. “Number one, we had to have guaranteed a maximum price contract, no overrides. And it had to be able to operate in a manner where there would be safety in the face of vandalism or daredevil acts. Who knows what some student might dream in relation to the turbine?”

Mr. Bride said he understood the concerns raised, but wanted to emphasize the fact that there are approximately 180,000 wind turbines operating across the world. He said the benefits of creating a renewable energy source — one that would likely provide the high school with all its required electricity — should not be overlooked.

“The whole issue of sustainability is so important,” he said. “Our energy costs are going up. If there’s anything we can do to mitigate this … this was an opportunity for Barrington to take the lead on this issue.”

Can the wind turbine be relocated?

Barrington residents concerned with the proposed location of a wind turbine in town were told at the Financial Town Meeting last week that sites other than the high school could be explored, as long as the bond was voted through that night and pending legislation at the statehouse was approved. According to Barrington Town Manager Peter DeAngelis, there may be one other factor to consider. Mr. DeAngelis said the no interest loan from the Internal Revenue Service may be site specific.

n Legislation: If approved by lawmakers, the legislation would allow for the transfer of energy from a different site to the high school, the town’s biggest energy consumer.

n Loan: Mr. DeAngelis said the $2.1 million no interest loan from the IRS may not be applicable if the site for the wind turbine was changed. The high school was listed as the location in the loan application.

By Josh Bickford

www.eastbayri.com

4 June 2008

Wind-watch.org recognizes Barrington’s concern.

http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/25/barrington-resident-challenges-zoning-of-wind-turbine/

An abutter to Barrington High School believes the town may be violating a number of zoning ordinances with its siting of the proposed wind turbine. Kathleen Shafer, who lives at 210 Lincoln Ave., recently requested a zoning certificate regarding the wind turbine, which is slated to be built on the school’s campus. The certificate would act to clarify the project with respect to any zoning implications of the proposed use.

Barrington Building Official Robert Speaker replied to the request by stating that the high school property — and all other town-owned property — was exempt from town zoning ordinances. He said the town has never had to apply for permits for construction projects or renovations to town-owned buildings on town property. “It’s exempt,” he said.

Still, Ms. Shafer said she will appeal the building official’s decision at a July 17 zoning board meeting.

Ms. Shafer, whose home is located just west of the high school, is one of an apparent growing number of residents concerned about the wind turbine project (see box for project details). Some people opposing the location of the wind turbine have started a group called Citizens’ Wind Watch of Barrington, which has its own website, citizenswindwatch.blogspot.com.

Others have filed letters to the editor or spoke at public meetings.

“It’s not just neighbors close to the school,” wrote Ms. Shafer in a recent e-mail. “It includes parents of students who are concerned about the impacts to the school and learning environment, the athletic fields, etc. from all over town.”

In a recent letter to the editor, Ron Russo, who lives on Candleberry Road, wrote that visual flicker and strobe effects could be caused by the wind turbine. He cited studies that showed negative physiological effects — sleep disorders, headaches and dizziness — for people living near wind turbines. “Do we want to subject students, teachers and residents to these negative health effects?” wrote Mr. Russo.

Jill Cuzzone, who lives on Lincoln Avenue, wrote a letter questioning different aspects of the project, including an apparent fast-tracking of the approval process. “Other municipalities interested in harnessing wind power have conducted local wind studies and analyses for many years — Ipswich, Mass., four years. The Barrington energy committee first met six months ago, and while I commend them for their efforts, it seems they have not truly had enough time to consider all the information nor addressed all the issues.”

Newell Thomas, who lives on Nayatt Road and has been working in the wind and solar energy business for three decades, said the town has taken the first step toward constructing a wind turbine, but “the work that has been completed is just the beginning of the effort required to make this project a reality. Now the serious work must begin.”

Officials respond

Town officials say the wind turbine project has been an example of the government not working slowly, something it has been criticized for in the past.

Peter DeAngelis, the town manager, said a number of factors have weighed into the decision of where to place the wind turbine. For starters, the high school is the largest consumer of electricity for any public building in town. Officials say there may be better sites for harnessing wind power in town, but there are currently restrictions from putting the tower in one location and transferring the electricity to the high school.

Officials have also stated a desire to be a leader in utilizing renewable energy sources, which has been an initiative for the governor.

Jim Bride, the former chairman for the renewable energy committee in town, said he understands the concerns of residents, but also recognized the importance of this project.

“The whole issue of sustainability is so important,” he said in an interview earlier this month. “Our energy costs are going up. If there’s anything we can do to mitigate this … this was an opportunity for Barrington to take the lead on this issue.”

Zoning issue

In a document drafted by her attorneys at the firm Blish and Cavanagh, Ms. Shafer states the construction of a wind turbine in excess of 300-feet on the site is unlawful and not permitted for a number of reasons:

First, because the high school property is zoned open space-active recreation and wind turbines are not permitted in that zoning; second, because the wind turbine would far exceed height limitations for both principal structures (35 feet) and accessory structures (18 feet) stated in the dimensional regulations table of the Barrington Zoning Ordinance; third, because no provision of the town’s zoning ordinance exempts the town from compliance; and fourth, because the town has no authority to amend the zoning ordinance in order to exempt itself from the necessary requirements.

The building official disagrees. He pointed to the town’s zoning ordinances, chapter 185, section 4 — “Compliance required.” The section includes the provision: “The Town of Barrington itself, both as to land owned by the Town and to governmental activity and use, shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter.”

Mr. Speaker said he will wait to see what zoning board decides after hearing the appeal, adding that the appeal to the zoning board may be acting as a necessary step in order to take the case to the courts.

Mr. Speaker also said that Ms. Shafer’s request of a zoning certificate on property other than her own was a bit unorthodox. “We give certificates on property that people own and want a ruling on, confirming or denying the legal status … we don’t speculate,” he said.

Project details

At the Barrington Financial Town Meeting in May, voters approved a $2.4 million bond to fund the production of a 246-foot wind turbine. The proposed location — between the varsity football and baseball fields at the high school — has become a point of contention. Here are some details regarding the project:

Height: The proposed tower’s height is 246 feet, with blade lengths of 80 feet, offering a total height of 326 feet.

Fall zone: The current location selected by officials places the tower less than 200 feet from the school building, which is well within the listed fall zone.

No interest loan: The town received approval for a $2.1 million no interest loan through the IRS, which may be site specific, meaning that if any location other than the high school is used the loan may be unavailable.

Behind the meter: The high school is reportedly the largest consumer of electricity for all public buildings. This proposed turbine would supply power directly to the school.

— By Josh Bickford

eastbayri.com

25 June 2008

approved legislation, projo article june 25, 2008

ills would widen sites for turbine

01:00 AM EDT on Wednesday, June 25, 2008

By C. Eugene Emery Jr.

Journal Staff Writer

BARRINGTON -- Both the House and Senate have separately approved legislation that would allow communities to erect wind turbines where they can generate the most electricity, and not just in locations where the power will be used, Sen. David Bates, R-Barrington, said yesterday.

At least one of those bills must be signed by Governor Carcieri before they become law.

In Barrington, the change would mean that the town would no longer have to put its proposed wind turbine at the high school, where it would be adjacent to some of the athletic fields and the school building.

The school property was selected as the best site because it has enough wind to make the turbine economical and the school is the town's biggest consumer of electricity. The current law only makes wind power profitable if communities that generate electricity use it at the site.

The new legislation would remove that limitation by establishing what is known as a "net metering" system, where the town can generate power at one location and get credit for the electricity it produces at other town-owned buildings.

Town Manager Peter DeAngelis said one site that has been discussed is at the end of Legion Way, on a small peninsula that extends into Brickyard Pond.

Climate maps show the average wind speed there to be faster than at the high school site.

The town is getting an interest-free federal loan to finance most of the project.

DeAngelis said yesterday that he has contacted federal officials to see if the town could shift the location of the turbine without losing the loan.

"Our initial conversations have been favorable," he said.

DeAngelis said the Legion Way site would put the turbine about 1,000 feet from any residence.

But that may not be enough for some of the wind-power critics who have tried to rally local opposition since voters overwhelmingly approved the 328-foot-tall turbine at last month's Financial Town Meeting.

Members of a group calling itself Citizens' Wind Watch of Barrington have begun handing out ! fliers s aying that no turbine of that size should be constructed within 1 1/4 mile of "homes, schools and other places where people learn, live or sleep."

Although the group claims it supports renewable energy, that restriction would prohibit the construction of any large wind turbine in Barrington, which is less than five miles from Nockum Hill to Rumstick Point.

The handout suggests, without citing a source, that up to 1 in 100 turbines lose at least one blade per year, posing a safety hazard.

In addition, the group cites unnamed "independent medical experts" who say the turbines can cause headaches, sleep disturbances, dizziness, nausea, heart problems, irritability, ringing in the ears, memory problems, concentration problems, and "a sense of penetrating vibration, or pulsation inside the human body, especially the chest, and these sensations can be accompanied by anxiety, compulsion to flee the environment, and even night terrors in young children."

And there's more.

The group says that sunlight flashing through the blades can produce a stroboscopic effect that "can cause body disharmony" and may lead to nausea, dizziness, disorientation and seizures.

To back up their claims, the group cites the Web site of Nina Pierpont, a New York pediatrician who says she discovered "Wind Turbine Syndrome" and recommends that turbines, in some cases, be located as far as three miles from homes.

Scientists are usually regarded as experts in a field only after they have authored studies that have been published in scientific or medical journals, where other experts have reviewed the findings for accuracy.

But Pierpont's four-page résumé lists no research articles on turbines or their effect on health.

Barrington's wind-energy committee, in contrast, has repeatedly insisted that the turbines are safe, citing their widespread use.

Barrington's Citizens' Wind Watch group, most of who live near the high school, was handing out the flier at Thursday's School Committee meeting.

During the meeting, with a ! ceiling fan rapidly spinning above their heads, they urged committee members to withdraw their permission to erect the turbine at the high school because of the danger it could pose.

"This is going to have a profound negative effect on the students," predicted critic Ron Russo, who said last night he was unfamiliar with the medical issues but objects to a 328-foot-tall structure being just 190 feet away from a school.

School Committee chairman Patrick "Buzz" Guida said his group had been assured by the town's wind-energy committee that the location would not pose a safety problem, but would reconsider if the site continues to be the high school and if real evidence of a hazard surfaces.

gemery@projo.com

Reply

Forward

Potential Legion site

FAQ (new!)

Why? What’s the problem with a wind turbine on the high school property?
Because, the site is NOT physically large enough to locate the wind turbine so that it adheres to the wind turbine manufacturers’ & the State of Rhode Island’s recommended setback distances for safe operation and maintenance. Please click on the Wind Turbine Safety Links, on our homepage, to get specific information. You can also read the various letters to the media, posted on our homepage, that cite some of the important & specific safety guidelines that the Town of Barrington RI is choosing to ignore.

Isn’t Citizens Wind Watch just a group of NIMBY’s that are trying to ruin the town of Barrington’s opportunity to have a renweable energy to offset the high schools electrical energy costs?
No. We are not just a group of NIMBY’s, many members of our coalition are non-abutters to the proposed wind turbine site at the Barrington High School. Again, Citizens Wind Watch is not anti-wind power.

Why would the Town Council choose to locate a wind turbine on the high school property, if that site is not actually large enough to meet the manufacturers’ & state’s safety guidelines?
That is one our primary questions as well – every individual that has this question should directed that question to the Barrington RI Town Council during the public comment portion of the upcoming Town Council meeting on 7/7/08, which begins at 7:30 pm at the Barrington, RI Town Hall.
You can also email this important question to the Town Council: TownCouncil@barrington.ri.gov

Is the Barrington High School site the optimum location for a wind turbine?
No. There is at least one other site in the town of Barrington that the town’s Renewable Energy Committee, which reports to the Town Council, has publically stated would be a better location in terms of:
Available wind, per statistical wind maps.
Meeting the manufacturers’ & State’s safety guidelines.
Construction management & maintenence, in that the other site is NOT on school property and would allow for year-round access, without interfering with school activities, etc.

Why isn’t the Town of Barrington proposing the “better” site?
Because the financing that they have applied for, is site-specific to the High School, due to a piece of legislation which (although very likely to pass), has not yet been passed by both houses of government at the state level.

Why not just wait for that legislation to pass, then explore the alternate, better site?
That is one our primary questions as well – every individual that has this question should directed that question to the Barrington RI Town Council during the public comment portion of the upcoming Town Council meeting on 7/7/08, which begins at 7:30 pm at the Barrington, RI Town Hall.
You can also email this important question to the Town Council: TownCouncil@barrington.ri.gov

Speaking of exploring viable sites for a wind turbine, has the Town of Barrington done site specific feasibility studies, such as those enumerated in the 6/18/08 letter to the editor of the Barrington Times entitled: “Town Needs Detailed Wind Feasibility Study”?
No.

OK, I’ve read through the health and safety concerns and now have this question: Considering that the proposed wind turbine is on the grounds of the Barrington High School, what are the core responsibilities of the Barrington School Committee, as a publically funded educational facility in the State of Rhode Island?
We can attempt to answer that with the following quotation:
RI GENERAL LAW: TITLE 16
SECTION 16-2-9
16-2-9 General powers and duties of school committees:
(8) To provide for the location, CARE, CONTROL, and MANAGEMENT of school facilities and equipment.

Hmmm. If the Barrington School Committee agrees to allow the Town of Barrington to locate a 328’ industrial wind turbine on the grounds of the public High School, wouldn’t they be going against the specific and clear wording of this law?
We the people of the Citizens Wind Watch, believe that would be for the courts to decide. We are not the judge, or jury in this matter. We are just concerned citizens that do CARE about people that attend, work in and visit, the facilities known as Barrington High School.

I now understand the physical damage and health & safety risks involved with these large wind turbines. What impact might an industrial wind turbine located on the grounds of the high school have on the insurance policy, and or the insurance premiums that cover the high school building and its occupants?
We the people of the Citizens Wind Watch do not know the answer to that, but believe that in the rush to push this project through, these issues may not have been evaluated by the Town Council, or explored by the School Committee. every individual that has this question should directed that question to the Barrington RI Town Council during the public comment portion of the upcoming Town Council meeting on 7/7/08, which begins at 7:30 pm at the Barrington, RI Town Hall. You can also email this important question to the Town Council: TownCouncil@barrington.ri.gov

Beyond the facility and its occupants, the proposed wind turbine location is close to some busy streets and power lines. Is that a good idea?
Based on our research, we the people of the Citizens Wind Watch, do not think that it is safe to have an industrial wind turbine close to power lines and streets.

Who owns those streets and power lines and do they know about and approve of the wind turbine on the grounds of the Barrington High School?
County Road (Route 114) is a State Highway and that Federal Road is a Town of Barrington Road. We do not know what entity actually owns the power lines. We do not know if the owners of these infrastructural roads and utility lines are aware of, or approve of an industrial, 328’ tall wind turbine in close proximity to their property & equipment, or if they do, what liability the Town of Barrington, or the even School Committee, as the manager of the Barrington High School facility might face if there were an accident involving the proposed wind turbine that caused damage to the property of others.

What about the Wind Turbine manufacturer? What do they say about such large scale industrial equipment in close proximity to a public school?
The following is from one wind turbine manufacturer’s owner’s manual:
"Stay and Traffic by the Turbine. Do not stay within a radius of 400 m (1300 ft.) from the turbine unless it is necessary. If you have to inspect an operating turbine from the ground, do not stay under the rotor plane but observe the rotor from the front.
Make sure that children do not stay by or play nearby the turbine.
If necessary, fence the foundation. The access door to the turbine must be locked in order to prevent unauthorised persons from stopping or damaging the turbine due to mal-operation of the controller."

Did Town Rush Into Turbine Project?

BARRINGTON TIMES

June 4, 2008

By Josh Bickford

www.eastbayri.com

“DID TOWN RUSH INTO TURBINE PROJECT?”

The vote over the proposed wind turbine in town has been cast, but that hasn’t stopped one man from raising concerns over the project. While the majority of people attending last week’s Financial Town Meeting voted in favor of a 264-foot wind turbine at Barrington High School, Ron Russo believes the project has too many problems for it to continue as proposed.

He pointed to the overall height of the tower, its proximity to the high school’s athletic fields and main building, some unclear information that could have confused voters, and said the project appeared to be fast-tracked by local town officials and the committee assigned to study the work.

Mr. Russo, a Candleberry Drive resident, attended the Financial Town Meeting on May 28 and even proposed an amendment to the wind turbine bond. He asked people to approve the construction of a wind turbine with the stipulation that it not be built at the high school. Voters defeated that request.

“I was late to this issue. I wasn’t paying that much attention. I wasn’t even planning on attending the town meeting. When I found out how high the tower was going to be at its location, I was surprised,” Mr. Russo said. “Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against building a wind turbine, but I feel like the high school is the wrong location for it.

“I feel like this was a rush to judgment. I think it’s the wrong size and the wrong location.”

Mr. Russo believes the deadline placed on this project pushed officials to fast-track the approval process. Barrington Town Manager Peter DeAngelis held a different perspective.

“People are used to government working slowly,” Mr. DeAngelis said. “Maybe this is an example where government is not working slowly. Last year council gave me three weeks to put together application.”

The application for a $2.1 million no interest loan through the Internal Revenue Service was filed, granted and officials later created a renewable energy committee. Jim Bride was named the chairman.

“When the committee formed at end of 2007 we were given this great opportunity. The town gave us a timeline to work with. They wanted us to make sure the citizens of Barrington, the school committee, and the town council were all on board,” Mr. Bride said.

Mr. Bride said on Monday that he is moving out of town in the near future.

“I can’t say enough about the people on this committee,” Mr. DeAngelis said. “These are good, knowledgeable people. The reason we were able to accelerate this project is because of the people who were on this committee and the work they did.”

Mr. Russo said a project of this magnitude, affecting the landscape dramatically, should not have moved as quickly.

“My feeling is that I think there was a rush to judgment to get this money,” Mr. Russo said. “I think they looked at the fact that they could get a no interest loan. They saw the money, put the application together, and they didn’t think through the impact. What about those people who own homes near the school. Their properties aren’t going to be worth dirt.”

Images questioned

Mr. Russo said the height of the tower was not correctly shown to residents and he added that the images used during the Financial Town Meeting presentation may have misled voters.

He said there was never a clear profile sketch provided to people, one that compared the heights of the wind turbine tower against existing structures like the high school building and the lights at the football field.

“The picture they showed of the tower was coming over the White Church Bridge. It was 5,000 feet away. There was no comparison drawing of what you’d see coming down County Road,” Mr. Russo said. “I think the (Barrington) Times was remiss by not showing how tall this was going to be.

“We’re going to be the laughing stock of the state. People are already laughing at Barrington for other reasons.”

Mr. DeAngelis said there were plenty of opportunities for people to get involved in the discussion process. He said there were open meetings, at which people did voice concerns and some changes were made.

“We had two public outreach sessions. At the first one we invited people who lived within 800 feet of the site. The second one was open to the public,” Mr. DeAngelis said. “We listened to what they wanted. They changed the location. Now the NIMBY [not in my back yard] crowd is bringing it about the school.”

Mr. Bride acknowledged that there were problems with the images presented at the meeting.

“I’ve heard feedback is that the image was hard to make out. I’m not denying that. We tried to do the best we could do,” he said.

Other issues

The information included in the Barrington Exploratory Wind Power Committee’s siting subcommittee report has also been brought into question.

A graphic included in the report shows the apparent minimum setback around the tower at 492 feet (drawn as a circle over the existing structures). The committee used an estimate of 500 feet for the graphic, but the scale appears off. In fact, the circle designating the setback appears closer to 300 feet rather than 500.

When asked about the graphic, Mr. Bride said he would take another look to see if the scale was inaccurate.

The fall zone for the tower is set at 328 feet, and while there are no private residences within 500 feet of the tower, the high school is less than 200 feet from the proposed tower’s base — well within the fall zone.

“These are not designed to fall down,” Mr. Bride said. “I know people have concerns, but there is a lot of engineering that goes into these projects.”

Patrick Guida, the chairman for the Barrington School Committee, said the board has studied the project and discussed it numerous times.

“Right now, based on what has been explained to us, we don’t believe safety is an issue,” he said. “From our perspective, there are different time frames when an accident would be more or less likely to occur.”

He said construction of the turbine could prove to be a dangerous period, especially when crews are moving the turbine blades into place.

“We have to be sure that the site would be cordoned off,” Mr. Guida said. “Could that be readily addressed and enough precautions taken during that period of time? Once it becomes operation, what are the concerns? If there were too great a wind, and if there was any malfunction, or if there were a problem because of an ice factor, that might also create an issue.”

Mr. Guida said much of his concerns and those of other school committee members were quelled by officials involved with the project. He said the committee will continue to monitor the proposed project closely.

“We approved this conditionally,” he said. “Number one, we had to have guaranteed a maximum price contract, no overrides. And it had to be able to operate in a manner where there would be safety in the face of vandalism or daredevil acts. Who knows what some student might dream in relation to the turbine?”

Mr. Bride said he understood the concerns raised, but wanted to emphasize the fact that there are approximately 180,000 wind turbines operating across the world. He said the benefits of creating a renewable energy source — one that would likely provide the high school with all its required electricity — should not be overlooked.

“The whole issue of sustainability is so important,” he said. “Our energy costs are going up. If there’s anything we can do to mitigate this … this was an opportunity for Barrington to take the lead on this issue.”

Can the wind turbine be relocated?

Barrington residents concerned with the proposed location of a wind turbine in town were told at the Financial Town Meeting last week that sites other than the high school could be explored, as long as the bond was voted through that night and pending legislation at the statehouse was approved. According to Barrington Town Manager Peter DeAngelis, there may be one other factor to consider. Mr. DeAngelis said the no interest loan from the Internal Revenue Service may be site specific.

On Legislation: If approved by lawmakers, the legislation would allow for the transfer of energy from a different site to the high school, the town’s biggest energy consumer.

On Loan: Mr. DeAngelis said the $2.1 million no interest loan from the IRS may not be applicable if the site for the wind turbine was changed. The high school was listed as the location in the loan application.

Wind turbine decision was rushed into

Barrington Times Letter to the Editor June 11, 2008 Wind turbine decision was rushed into

To answer the question posed on page 1 of last week's Times: YES, I believe that the town has rushed into the wind turbine project! First, I am an environmentally conscious architectural lighting designer and therefore inherently "green minded." I also agree wholeheartedly with Ron Russo's comments. And I'm sure that all of the volunteers on the Barrington Exploratory Wind Power Committee are "good, knowledgeable people" as stated by Peter DeAngelis. But this issue should not pass just because good, knowledgeable people have painted the picture they had intended to paint from day one. This wind turbine issue certainly feels like a rush to get the funding, which by the way, although interest free, is nothing that should be rushed into, no matter how great the desire to go-green may be. Here are some additional questions and thoughts for the town to consider: 1. How can such a small committee rush so quickly into such a massive endeavor without a thorough feasibility study? 2. Mr. DeAngelis said, "there were plenty of opportunities for people to get involved in the decision process." Is "two meetings" plenty? and what does he mean by "decision" process? It's called the exploratory committee, not the "Rush To Decide — Secure The Money — Then Hope It All Works Out" committee. 3. How competent can the committee be when the graphics portrayed to the townspeople were not done to the correct scale and were shown from a favorable viewpoint and distance? 4. Why was there not a plan view of the proposed location printed in the newspaper? I still do not have a sense of the intended location on the BHS campus. 5. Why, when the turbine is 246 feet tall, would only the residents in an 800-foot radius be notified about the opportunities to express their concerns? Why not a distance of 1,500 feet, which would represent a viewing angle of approximately 10 degrees above horizontal eye level? 6. Have any multi-season wind velocity tests been conducted at the precise location (and elevation)? 7. The turbine at Portsmouth Abbey is smaller and it cost approximately $1.2 million only a few years ago. Why is this one twice the price? 8. Why would such an important, high impact, high cost project not be a ballot issue? 9. If Mr. DeAngelis is going to throw down the "NIMBY" card he should be cognizant of the fact that the BHS is in everyone's back yard. How many people of Barrington pass by the intersection of County and Federal roads at least twice per day? My estimate: 60 to 80 percent. 10. Why not spend the time to do a thorough feasibility study, including consideration of the possible passage of legislation that would allow the power from the wind turbine to be routed from the optimum (windiest) location to the BHS? I live about 805 feet from the BHS, but do not consider myself a NIMBY. I'm more of a NIIHBFE (Not If It Hasn't Been Fully Evaluated), kind of person. Markus Earley 43 Upland Way

Wind turbine location has problems

*****************************************************************

Barrington Times

Letter to the Editor

June 11, 2008

Wind turbine location has problems

I have great concerns with respect to the 328-foot tall wind turbine that will be constructed 130 feet from a school and in close proximity to many homes. As a non-abutter to the project, it is my hope that town officials will reject the proposed location. Some science-based concerns include: 1. The turbine manufacturer, GE, states the minimum set-back from a building should be 492 feet and the Barrington Committee for Renewable Energy states it should be 500 feet to create a safe fall down/topple zone. Why then is the proposed location 130 feet from the school? 2. Wind turbines produce visual flicker and strobe effects at certain times of the day cause by shadows cast by moving blades when the sun is visible, which can induce body disharmony. Students and homeowners within 980 feet of the turbine are within the high impact strobe zone and can expect more than 200 hours per year of strobe effect. Should we subject our children and homeowners to this? 3. The turbine blades are exposed to extreme forces in the course of each revolution. Cases of blade drop/throw have occurred. How can we protect our school children from this possibility? 4. What is the mean and maximum wind speed at the high school location? Town officials say they don't know and a study has not been done, and as such the economics of the project are unknown. Does this make sense? 5. As a result of investigations of noise pollution, sleep disorders, headaches, and dizziness, the advice of the French National Academy of Medicine, Dr. Amanda Harry, Dr. Nina Pierpont, and reports such as UKNA's "Location, Location, Location" is that wind turbines be sited at least 1.25 to 1.5 miles away from schools and homes. Do we want to subject students, teachers and residents to these negative health effects? I support renewable energy but it seems the cost imposed upon our children and neighbors is much too great if a turbine is located 130 feet from a school and close to homes. Ronald D. Russo 8 Candleberry Road