County board: Crescent Ridge 2 feels impact of economy
PRINCETON — Developers of the Crescent Ridge 2 wind project are being hit hard by the nation’s struggling economy.
At Tuesday’s meeting of the Bureau County Board, Crescent Ridge 2 attorney Paul Scoma said the developers are having trouble getting their letter of credit/cash escrow in place before the conditional use permits expire for the proposed rural Tiskilwa wind farm. With the economy as it is, everyone is having trouble getting letters of credit, Scoma said.
The developers also want the county to go ahead and issue the needed building permits for the project. However, Bureau County’s zoning ordinance requires the developers to have a letter of credit/cash escrow in place to fund the decommissioning plan before the county issues the building permits.
Scoma said the developers are projecting they would not do any “substantial” work at the site before mid-April. Everything, including the letter of credit/cash escrow, should be in place 30 days prior to the beginning of any construction, he said. However, the developers want the building permits now in order to do some engineering and staking work yet this winter, Scoma said.
According to Scoma, the county is not out anything by granting the extension and issuing the building permits. A $300,000 check for the building permits is ready to be cashed, which would bring money into the county. Also, the developers are willing to make any required adjustments to the decommissioning and road agreements in order to get the wind farm built in 2009.
If the county approves the request, Scoma said the developers will amend their original decommissioning plan by increasing the approved $19,879 per turbine decommissioning cost, as set in the original agreement, to about $33,000 per turbine, which is in line with current rates.
The developers would also agree to upgrade the original road agreement, which was piggy-backed on the Crescent Ridge 1 project, to follow the new Walnut Ridge road agreement, with any additions required by County Engineer John Gross.
The original road agreement is extremely inadequate, with vague wording, a lack of liability insurance, and inadequate turbine fees, Gross said. Getting that agreement corrected will take some time, he said.
Ward Marshall, representing investment firm and Crescent Ridge 2 partner Babcock and Brown, said Babcock and Brown is restructuring in light of the national economy and will focus on infrastructure work, like wind projects. Having the building permits issued for Crescent Ridge 2 will make that project more viable for investors, Marshall said.
After a 90-minute discussion, the county board unanimously approved a motion by Marshann Entwhistle to table any action on the Crescent Ridge 2 request until the board’s January meeting.
Until then, the Crescent Ridge 2 developers will continue to work on getting details in place for a Dec. 18 hearing with the Zoning Board of Appeals. At that hearing, the developers will present their case for the county board to grant an extension for their conditional use permits.
By Donna Barker
11 December 2008
Tags: Wind power, Wind energy
Some possibly related stories:
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.
