Holding hallowed ground
For a company that hopes to start construction on Virginia’s first wind energy plant in the next few months, Highland New Wind Development appears to be dragging its heels.
Recently, the state Department of Conservation and Recreation said it had not heard from the developer after requesting more information in its initial review.
Last week, Virginia’s Department of Historic Resources said it still awaits a view shed study, among other things, before it can offer recommendations for softening the impact of 400-foot towers on Highland County’s tallest summit.
In the last three months, updates from the developer to Highland’s supervisors haven’t yielded much new information. HNWD says it’s still seeking investors, has not finalized a power purchase agreement, and cannot complete a final site plan because securing turbine equipment has become harder to do.
The DHR, for its part, wants to know exactly what historic resources lie within a 1.5-mile radius of the project site, and insists a proper view shed study be conducted.
HNWD argues such studies are expensive ($75,000 or more) and unwarranted. It told the DHR it would agree to an archaeological survey, but not a view shed analysis or survey of other historic resources, saying one had already been done. DHR says that study wasn’t comprehensive or complete.
So who’s right?
Clearly, the DHR has every good reason to require these studies. Experts from that agency, the National Trust, the West Virginia preservation office, and others agree a viewshed analysis is standard in these cases. Not only that, but most believe a federal historic review would be the best method to survey potentially important buildings and places, since there are methods on the federal level that can be more helpful in determining how best to site the 18-20 towers on Allegheny Mountain.
HNWD’s protests are nothing new. For years, the company has resisted providing anything but the minimum to reviewing agencies. It consistently demands a faster track for approval, and preferential treatment because its utility is smaller in size than most. It repeats this pattern again now, telling the DHR it shouldn’t have to provide more information, and spending that kind of money would be a waste of its “resources.”
The reality is, since no formal study has been done, we don’t really know what the impact of the turbines will be or what might lie nearby. The State Corporation Commission and the Highland County Board of Supervisors both issued permits with conditions that ask for some kind of analysis of what these things will look like. Given the height and elevation involved, this is a reasonable request.
Not only should the view be simulated and examined, but also a full federal-level analysis of historic resources should be conducted. Those of us living here know the area is rich in history spreading over hundreds of years. We already know Camp Allegheny is a fascinating, well-preserved battleground unmatched in its environment except perhaps by McDowell Battlefield a few short miles away. Just because it isn’t Gettysburg doesn’t mean it should be left vulnerable and unprotected. It was a key turning point right before Gen. Stonewall Jackson kicked off his famous Valley Campaign, and is already listed on the National Register of Historic Places — a status it has held for nearly two decades. Maybe it’s impossible to site the towers out of view from the encampment, but we won’t know until a proper study is done.
The fact that it lies in West Virginia, not Virginia, is irrelevant. West Virginia preservationists should be invited to the table for discussions, and a federal review, under the circumstances, would make it easier for all those who want to be included to participate, from Civil War groups, to state agencies and the U.S. Forest Service, which owns a portion of the battlefield.
Furthermore, these surveys should really be conducted beyond 1.5 miles. That radius is based on the distance used for siting cell towers. These turbines will be spinning blades in groups at least four times the height of the average cell tower, and be seen for miles due to their elevation at 4,200 feet.
DHR should stand its ground and insist on getting the information it needs. And the SCC and board of supervisors should support the department’s position. There’s no need now to back away from the conditions carefully considered for two full years before the permits were issued and discount so many experts’ opinions.
HNWD, understandably, would like to avoid any extra time or money whenever possible. But our heritage is too important to let one manmade facility destroy eras of history without even trying to minimize the damage.
4 September 2008
The copyright of this article is owned by the author or publisher indicated. Its availability here constitutes a "fair use" as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law as well as in similar "fair dealing" exceptions of the copyright laws of other nations, as part of National Wind Watch's effort to advance understanding of the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development. For more information, click here.
Blog it:
Tags: Wind power, Wind energy
|
