[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Grand Valley wind hearing goes to mediation  

In a potentially complicated and protracted hearing into the proposed East Luther Grand Valley wind farms, the parties have agreed to Ontario Municipal Board vicechair Jan de P. Seaborn’s “suggestion” of a Boardsponsored mediation in an effort to get things sorted out.

The hearing of a George Pullen appeal opened at the Amaranth council chambers Tuesday morning. It will go to mediation on a date to be determined early next week, and then to a pre-hearing conference for possibly two days in mid-to-late March.

Complicating the issues, while Amaranth resident Pullen is appealing the ELGV zoning for turbines to the west of his property, wind-farm proponent Wind Rush Energy is appealing Mr. Pullen’s two severances (in Amaranth) for home construction.

In the meantime, Amaranth Township is seeking to have the wind project’s Environmental Screening Report elevated to a full Environmental Assessment.

Tuesday’s session was intended to be a pre-hearing into Mr. Pullen’s appeal. It didn’t sound that way, as Wind Rush lawyer John Dawson generally outlined arguments in favour of alternative energy, conformance with the Provincial Policy Statement, and the need for municipalities to work together.

He said the Wind Rush and Pullen proposals are both for “new uses within the same geographic area,” and suggested the greater public interest should be paramount.

Ms. Seaborn said at one point she was frustrated, and at another “having a problem (with some of Mr. Dawson’s requests, such as to consolidate all the issues).” She said the purpose of pre-hearing conferences is usually “to identify the parties, (establish the issues), and determine (timelines).”

Mr. Dawson wasn’t prepared to estimate the time required.

As a further complication at this early stage, the ELGV ESR is to be released on or about Jan. 25. As well, ELGV council has yet to approve its bylaws with respect to the wind farm. As well, the ELGV Official Plan has yet to win ministerial approval.

Additionally, negotiations with the First Nations (as the turbines would all be within the Haldimand Tract) have not apparently concluded. “Aboriginal negotiations are not done quickly,” said Amaranth lawyer Jeff Wilker, who added that there is “no evidence that the ministry of municipal affairs and housing would make an (early) decision on the OP in ELGV.”

Representing Mr. Pullen, lawyer Herbert Arnold indicated his major concerns are for the precise location of at least one turbine, and for copies of any acoustical reports. “I ask that those be disclosed within three weeks,” he said.

Amaranth resident Paul Thompson, who is not a party to the hearing, said outside the hearing that he is concerned about the type of transformer to be used by Wind Rush, as he would be directly to the east of where the transformers are proposed.

Although the proposed transformers are 44 kilovolts (as opposed to the Canadian Hydro Developers 230 kV ones), Mr. Thompson said his information is that they are noisier. This is likely to be one of the issues to be settled between the acoustical experts.

On the “noise footprint” of the turbines themselves, Mr. Wilker pointed out that the turbines to be used by Wind Rush are not the same as the General Electric version used by Canadian Hydro.

By Wes Keller
Freelance Reporter

Orangeville Citizen

17 January 2008

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.