 |
Ads by Google
Money
Sign up for our FREE online daily news service. Your up to the minute business information source.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Last updated at 11:05 PM on 07/09/08 |
Scaled-down wind farm granted permit 
Number of turbines reduced, but area landowners 'generally don’t like these things’
RAISSA TETANISH
Amherst Daily News
AMHERST – With many residents along the Gulf Shore opposed to the idea, a 17-turbine wind farm for the area was recently granted a development permit.
Originally, the proposed Pugwash Wind Farm was planned with up to 30 turbines, but scaled back to 17 after concerns from some of the area residents.
“The main reason we scaled it back would be in order to move it back (from the shoreline),” said Clair Peers, director of Cobequid Area Wind Farms Inc., a joint venture company owned by Atlantic Wind Power Corporation Ltd. and Cobequid Wind Power Inc.
Cumberland County Municipality has a bylaw in place restricting wind turbines to be placed within 500 meters, or three times the turbine height, from a residence. Cobequid Wind Farms Inc. took the bylaw one step further.
“Even though we were in compliance with the bylaw at 500, because there was still a lot of concern with them being too close, and people were asking for as much as a kilometre, we said that when we would scale it back, we would look at that, and we did,” Peers said, noting one of the property owners negotiating with the company backed out, leaving them with less property.
Following the development permit approval, Peers met with several people with concerns, including Lisa Betts.
“Certainly the people who were meeting with (Peers) made it very clear that even this amended project was not what we were looking for,” said Betts.
“By trying to move a few turbines back by a few hundred meters is not paying attention to what we are saying — that this affects the whole neighborhood, not just the immediate people.”
Betts said the wind farm will affect everyone, directly or indirectly.
“It is our contention that people generally don’t like these things and certainly wouldn’t choose to build a house or retirement home, or come on holidays to an area that has these things flapping around in the background.
“This is ultimately going to affect our economy.”
Although the project has been granted a development permit, a buyer for the power has yet to come on board. Peers says Cobequid Wind Farms Inc. did not make an application with Nova Scotia Power for this project.
“We felt the timing was not right and that we were not suitably prepared. We took the extra time to revisit our plans and make some adjustments,” he said.
“We were really unsettled with the public consultation process. There were a lot of unhappy people and we weren’t sure what the real consensus was with the property owners here.”
Next for the project, says Peers, is another public consultation with property owners involved. He acknowledges a petition started by Betts and other concerned residents, but feels surveying the property owners will paint a better picture for the company’s purposes and the purpose of the environmental assessment.
Betts says of the 1,200 signatures on the petition, those that didn’t sign in opposition to any wind farm, not just the amended proposal, are those property owners involved, their friends and neighbours.
“Of all the people that live in the area and live along the Gulf Shore, we have about 70 to 80 per cent that don’t want this wind power. Take those (property owners, friends and neighbours) out of the picture and the percentage gets even higher,” Betts said.
rtetanish@amherstdaily.com
|
08/09/08
|
Comments: |
|
This Conversation is Semi-Moderated. What is moderation?
|
| What does moderation mean? |
 |
The Amherst Daily News is committed to encouraging intelligent discourse among our readers and to creating a forum where diverse views and opinions on a wide range of topics can be aired. The forum you are in now is a result of our continuing efforts to facilitate a dynamic online conversation among our readers.
This is a semi-moderated or reactively moderated conversation. Once a reader follows the steps to register and submit his or her comment it goes directly to the website. A comment may be edited or deleted for reasons of content or language.
All readers wishing to join a conversation must first sign in and agree to the Terms of Usage, which explain the rules of acceptable content.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BJ from NS writes: I guess a coal burning generator or nuclear plant is better!!? How about forgetting about electricity altogether and going back to whale oil lamps and burning what little wood is left. We have a chance at clean fuel and she's putting up walls. Unbelievable!
|
| Posted 08/09/2008 at 7:09 AM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
|
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
|
judith from ottawa, on writes: Where do you live BJ? I'll give those wind farmers your address!
|
| Posted 08/09/2008 at 9:49 AM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
|
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
|
ThisGirl from NS writes: I'm 100% with you on this one BJ!
|
| Posted 08/09/2008 at 12:12 PM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
|
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
|
Icy Hotpatch from Amherst, NS writes: We no longer have the choice to let our petty NIMBY feelings rule the way we make decisions that affect the environment. Wind farms may not be perfect, however they are part of the future, and BJ said it right - this is so much better than staying the course! I do not believe for one minute that wind turbines are going to have a negative effect on the Gulf Shore. That is just selfish hogwash.
|
| Posted 08/09/2008 at 1:46 PM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
|
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
Sebastian Ronin from Nova Scotia writes: Ms. Betts:
Rather than engaging in the ongoing soap opera with Cobequid, has anyone ever considered a class action suit for lost revenue, i.e. property values/sales, against the County? Think about it. Who is liable? Who made the decision that will translate into the loss of likely millions of dollars?
If Council was to receive a shot across the bow via a letter on legal letterhead, dollars to donuts, they might crumble like a poorly baked cake.
Also, is going full-scale political in this, an election year, an option?
|
| Posted 08/09/2008 at 6:47 PM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
|
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
LilyThePink from NS writes: In this, apparently, democratic country, you don't have to agree with the majority who have spoken so clearly in Pugwash, but like any other valid, widely point of view, respect it. The people who love and enjoy the area for what it is right now deserve to be heard.
We are told repeatedly that wind energy can be found everywhere, so go find a better location where these 400' monsters can't bother anyone and THEN build the transmission lines to them.
Wind is fickle. NS can only handle a certain amount of unpredictable energy, so there is no need to be putting up turbines where they are not wanted. Unfortunately there will ALWAYS be a requirement for base energy from coal/oil/nuclear.
|
| Posted 08/09/2008 at 6:56 PM | Alert an Editor | Link to comment |
| ALERT US ABOUT THIS COMMENT |
|
Please let us know if this reader's comment breaks the rules explained in the Terms of Usage and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don't break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
|
|
|
NOTE
The management of this site emphasizes that it is in no way liable for persons, physical or legal, who are hosted here. Moreover, the managers of this site may not be held liable for errors and omissions that may slip into the information displayed in these reader comments. Everyone who submits a comment should read, understand and agree to the Terms of Usage for this section.
|
|
|
|
|
